EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Countering the Rightwing Policy Machine with a Deeper Progressive Bench
In 1973, a small but powerful group of right-wing state legislators and activists met in Chicago. They gathered to form an organization for those who believe that government, in their words, ought to be limited and “closest to the people.” And since, thanks to Chief Justice John Roberts and Mitt Romney, we know that corporations are, in fact, people, it makes sense that Exxon Mobil, Wal-Mart and Koch Industries are among the funders of this secretive and influential group, the American Legislative Exchange Council, known by its sweet-sounding acronym ALEC.
For nearly forty years, ALEC has quietly and successfully pushed its extremist agenda in state assemblies across the country. As The Nation and the Center for Media Democracy exposed last summer — work recently cited by The New York Times’ Paul Krugman — ALEC literally writes state laws by providing fully drafted model legislation to more than 2,000 state legislators. This corporate leviathan backed the recent national conservative push to further enrich the one percent while rolling back workers’ rights, inventing new ways to harass and debase women and suppressing the vote. They also wrote the so-called “Stand Your Ground” gun bills that now blight some 20 states across the country and are implicated in the killing of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin.
While conservatives are skilled puppeteers, progressives are great at mobilizing people and channeling energy for the big fights, whether it’s putting the crisis of income inequality at center stage, or even electing a progressive president. But ALEC’s astonishing influence exposes the progressive Achilles’ heel: a lack of a similarly entrenched, nationwide infrastructure of state and local policymakers and advocates that can create and support lasting change.
Sure, well-coordinated progressive responses throughout the country, thus far, have prevented more extensive damage to our democracy. Mississippi, for instance, soundly defeated a ballot initiative to legalize “fetus personhood.” Maine saved same-day voter registration at the ballot box. The people of Wisconsin have fought back against a relentless right-wing attack on workers’ rights and forced Governor Scott Walker into a recall election.
But playing defense isn’t enough. The progressive movement needs to build a bench that can play offense at the grassroots, local, state and national levels, and one that is positioned to pull every lever of power in our multi-layered political system. Without that, for every big union busting bill defeated, or every progressive president elected, there still will be hundreds of right-wing initiatives percolating through the political system, eroding our rights and unraveling our hard-earned progress.
The good news is that this is already happening, resulting in key wins on paid sick leave, the minimum wage and gay and lesbian equality at the state and local levels. “People are now looking to do what the right has done so effectively — coordinating ideas, narratives, legislators and activists to really push in a progressive direction,” says New York City councilman and Progressive Caucus co-chair Brad Lander.
It was in this spirit that Lander met earlier this month with other progressive city leaders from across the country, key allies and groups like Progressive States Network, New Bottom Line and PolicyLink, to discuss the creation of a national network focused on promoting local progressive action by sharing and spreading great legislative ideas. This budding network joins established organizations like the Center for American Progress, Working Families Party, Progressive Majority, and Center on Wisconsin Strategy.
At the same time, Progressive Majority director Gloria Totten and a range of allies are pursuing a complementary project called the Elected Officials Alliance to coordinate state lawmakers across issue and organizational lines. Ultimately, the goal is to link state and local officials to policy organizations, like the Economic Analysis and Research Network (EARN). All of these groups are aiming to build a counterforce to ALEC.
On the policy front, the centerpiece of the effort is an initiative called the American Legislative and Issue Campaign Exchange (ALICE), started by Center on Wisconsin Strategy director Joel Rogers. ALICE would offer model laws for both state and local legislators and support citizen-directed efforts like ballot initiatives, all based on the values of equity, sustainability and responsible government.
But much more is needed. To successfully counter ALEC, the progressive movement also needs troops on the ground to complement the work of legislators. While conservatives may have built the best movement that money can buy, progressives build movements fueled by what politicians need more than money: people and their votes.
That’s why the time is right for this week’s launch of the 99 Percent Spring, a new movement led by a huge coalition of progressive organizations — from MoveOn.org to the UAW. It will train 100,000 people across the country to tell the true story of how the one percent’s financial excess and political abuse destroyed our economy. Participants will be trained and equipped to campaign for change through non-violent direct action.
As I’ve often said, political leaders move to where the energy is. If we want to see lasting progressive change, we need to inject that energy, driven by ideas and strategy, into every level of the process. That’s what the growing networks of progressive legislators and the 99 Percent Spring are positioned to do.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
35 Comments so far
Show AllExcuse me while I puke.
Ditto.
Team Obama spent the winter expediting legislation to make OWS' (and any other pro-99% orgainzations' ) activities illegal, thereby assuring a silent spring. The 1% loves having a constitutional law expert in the White House.
...then the article has a picture with a monoculture of sunflowers stretching as far as the eye (aye!) can see....
:)
Call me pessimistic but after Obama got rightwinger Elena Kagan to replace liberal-leaning John Paul Stevens in 2010, it was crystal clear that there's no hope of getting anything close to a progressive bench until we the voters stop picking Democrat or Republican for president. As far ALEC is concerned, there used to exist a progressive counterpart called PLAN later renamed? to Progressive States Network (http://www.progressivestates.org/).
The idea that at least the Democrats appoint progressive SCOTUS judges ended when the DNC was formed in 1985.
When Stevens (who was appointed by GOP President Gerald Ford in 1975) retired in 2010 he was MORE progressive than any other sitting SCOTUS judge.
Obama's criteria for nominating Elena Monsanto Kagan was her broad popularity with the GOP and at least some of the LGBT community.
Didn't she also believe in the Unitary Executive Theory?
Since nearly all of Obama's actions during the past 3.5 years have been pro-unitary executive, anybody who does not zealously support the theory and implementation will not get the time of day from Obama.
One of Obama's first actions as president was an attempt to enable the President to bail out banks without Congressional approval.
I think that was the DLC (Democratic Leadership Conference), not the DNC (Democratic National Committee). Which really doesn't matter a whole lot because they are presently indistinguishable.
Thanks for the correctiion..I sometimes experience acronym overflow.
Do you really think the powers who really run this World would 'let' another party rule?
The coup is long ago accomplished.
We live like 3rd country people almost. We have illusions of Freedom but the wool is coming off. Fast.
You still have some wool left where you live?
The only difference between 99% of Americans and their third world brethren is the US Dollar making easy credit available to Americans. As soon as the dollar fizzles, Americans will be no different than their 99% counterparts in the third world
No doubt that the current powers will do anything at all costs to keep third parties from making it to office unless they thought any of them were some kind of assets. My post was directed at the idiots who keep arguing that we should just vote Democrat to keep the Supreme Court from moving to the right when that myth has been busted a long time ago.
Raydelcamino, thanks for the reminder on the connection between Kagan and Monsanto. I found results on Google. I've seen too many idiots both online and in the real world still insisting that Kagan is "liberal". Call me a looney but those same idiots drive me nuts to where I seriously believe that they should be sent to Haiti while the Haitians should be given full legal immigration status for this country's crimes against Haiti.
It's touching to find vanden Heuvel, in her childlike simplicity, writing sunnily of "electing a progressive president".
The commonsensical realists and pragmatists alone have established, perhaps inadvertently, that "progressive president" has become an oxymoron.
One can't really have a "progressive" Unitary Executive, after all. And that's what occupying, pardon the expression, the Oval Office Throne is all about.
Perhaps a fit candidate will emerge from "the growing networks of progressive legislators"-- by which she refers to the likes of Jill Stein and Rocky Anderson, I suppose, although it seems a stretch to imply that they constitute a "growing network".
Not to quibble, though; with faith and determination, by and by a suitable candidate will arise from that bench, or else simply ride in on a unicorn.
lol
Today, the blogosphere was a chatter with a piece from WaPo showing that obama care increased the deficit
There were takedowns from Chait, E Klein, P Krugman, and B deLong (of just the ones I know about)
And together, these four very articulate and intelligent gentlemen didn't , among themselves, find 20 minutes to explain what was wrong in an intelligble manner; the explanatin offered was opaque, to say the least.
some bench
Obviously if you aren't going to do anything to reduce health care costs, then adding more people to the mix will increase total costs. Obviously putting more people on Medicaid (133% of the federal poverty level) means someone has to pay for those additional Medicaid costs. The same is true of any government "help" people will require to buy private health insurance policies. Again, this will cost money. There is really no way you can add tens of millions of people without adding to the costs of health care. Not without making the providers of health care receive less money.
This is actually about how they do it in the rest of the developed world BTW. Of course the doctors there get their medical educations at least partially paid for by the government, and through control of the legal profession, malpractice is hardly a concern. Plus the countries all negotiate drug prices, so they pay less for those.
Ahh the complexity and confusion of liberalism! Be sure to mix good and bad in such a way to endlessly mesmerize the people while you drive them like slaves, dear liberals! Fortunately for the people, the people are learning to reject liberalism absolutely. The people are beginning to understand that liberals provide evil its link to humanity. That liberalism provides the human ego, the source of all evil, a back door to contaminate the good side of human nature. The people are coming to understand that for this basic reason, liberalism has to be dismissed in its entirety. And when the people do, the people discover that they truly can have it all, everything good, universal enlightenment, solidarity, equity and justice. And the people are starting to go for it. ALEC is simply another piece of garbage on the great mountain of elite garbage, and we don't need liberals shrieking that one piece of garbage is better than another.
Ugh, excuse me but instead of completely trashing liberalism, perhaps you could try being more specific. Let's start out with corporate "liberalism" vs working class liberalism. I'll reject the former while bringing back the latter. It was working class liberalism that powered up FDR's New Deal. By the way, I'm just curious as to why you're not including the need to ditch the current bankrtuped "conservative" ideology that's responsible for the mess we're in? I don't think you're a rightwinger but think it would be helpful if you would be more specific about what needs to come forth in place of what you recommend be abolished.
'Let's start out with corporate "liberalism" vs working class liberalism'
Working class liberalism is really submission, surrender, with a happy face painted on. No can do. The people are learning that we can't carry a mixed bag of good and bad, as that confuses and ultimately paralyzes us. I'm really sorry if that offends people but such offense was taught - part of the indoctrination - and it has to be faced - it has to be thrown off like a parasite has to be thrown off your back.
'I'm just curious as to why you're not including the need to ditch the current bankrtuped "conservative" ideology that's responsible for the mess we're in?'
Because liberals and konservatives are a very close team of thespians playing out their fake contest to distract the people from the people's very own way, the third way. Katrina, et al, paint stage left, their opponents paint stage right, and the audience is mesmerized at the spectacle and forget all about the reality on the ground, that the theatrical show runs on the backs of the people, while the people's visions, initiatives, and successes are absolutely marginalized.
It's true that liberalism doesn't push back and can be looked upon as part of the problem. By the way, I just remembered your posts on the need to go local and definitely appreciate it. A strong case could be made for the need to go more local and minimize foreign imports as much as possible. It's not right or left to advocate the need for going local and amazingly, most people on both sides of the political spectrum actually welcome localism. About this "right vs left" divide, I agree with you and others who believe that such stereotyping must stop although we'll get attacked for it. Thanks for your feedback and clearing up the misunderstanding.
Hi Max, Cassie here. I don't know what "liberal" or 'progressive" mean anymore, since polls show that 70-80% of people who so identify themselves support Obama, who in most respects is to the right of Nixon and Reagan, and on civil liberties on par with Pinochet. I propose a new label, ethicrat, meaning someone whose political views are rooted in ethical standards, not partisanship or personality cultism.
Point taken and thanks for bringing this up. The term "ethicrat" looks interesting. Can't see what's wrong with that given the current technocrats in Washington. You're not the only one who's tired of political labels so you're safe. Some here have gone as far as to make the case for ditching ideological labels altogether and focusing on just getting it right on principles. I think that's where your term can come in and fill the growing void among the disaffected.
No Mention from the Nation Magazine's Head Obot that Obama is a Right-wing Policy Machine.
Also a perfect example of what this Astroturf 99% Spring is all about, Co-Mingle with and GOTV for DemoRats.
Kind of funny to call the UAW progressive. One would have to go back to the days of Walter Reuther to justify that.
ALEC is successful because it's about graft. Campaign funding is exchanged for legislation passed. There are plenty of legislators (Dem and Repug) that are OK with the right-wing corporatist bent of ALEC. If they don't have to write the laws that they otherwise would support, then hey, that's all right with them.
I'd submit that it's a much greater problem than having a well-funded "liberal" alternative to ALEC on hand. Contrary to what Americans may have been taught in their civics classes, there is no back and forth shift where we all end up in the middle. It's pretty much a one-sided affair, and having more "liberal" lobbying groups won't cut any sway. What we don't have right now is a representative democracy, and it's because of the two-party, corporate-controlled and -funded system.
Here's what we have to do.
1. Get representation in Congress. At present, we don't have it.
2. Elect third-party candidates and achieve majority control in Congress. This is the only way forward short of revolution or mass revolt. Sorry, you won't get there by expecting the Progressive Caucus of the Democratic Party to vote your way. When the chips are down and money is on the line, they won't be on your side. Think John Conyers, Barbara Lee, etc.
3. Once in power, change the electoral laws to make the process more democratic (small "d"). A lot could be said there.
Third-party building is the key. Katrina vanden Heuvel and other erstwhile "liberals" (meaning Democratic Party supporters, I think) need to acknowledge the hopeless position of continuing the status quo approaches that fail us every day. It's not for lack of trying since liberal pressure groups are still out there with big staffs in Washington. However, any public interest pressure group acting today is bound for failure because there's no representation under the duopoly.
Let's digest this cold hard fact. No matter how much we may feel good about a campaign or rallying effort, if there's no one home in Washington that gets the message, it's wasted effort. The target of public-interest pressure groups should not be Congress. Instead, they should work to educate the public. If the many groups out there were to coordinate their efforts with, say, the Green Party, that would begin building the public understanding that could lead to systemic change. The aim is not to introduce laws or stay permanently in a defensive position - it's to change the system by peaceful democratic means. Public organizing and third party building is more important than Washington lobbying.
Well said.
This author is the female equivalent of Robert Reich. A partisan "till I die" Democrat, who those"s who are paying attention know, it's not about conservative's vs progressive's.
It's about the ruling political class vs. the rest of us.
Political party at this point is a distraction for the ill-informed and the mentally weak.
Shame on her and her paid-off phony kind.
Thank you, "Thoughts_Into_Action" for your astute, constructive post. Green Party support and education of the public are the keys. We found out last time what seeking a Savior in a presidential candidate gets us. Hard work, persistence over many years: Yes, we have other things to do, but better things?
Say what you will about Vanden Huffle, she at least provides some comic relief to these pages.
:)
What a bunch of bigots on this thread! There's no other word for it. KVH didn't mention "democrats" or "Obama" once, and yet so many just assume she did and jump down her throat based on past articles or personal bias. I guarantee, if this article was penned by say Rocky Anderson or Cynthia McKinney, the same posters would be exploding with joy. There isn't a single point made in this article that doesn't express sentiments I've seen expressed by numerous CD posters before. And yet those same sentiments expressed by KVH are somehow "ridiculous", "a joke", etc.
I swear sometimes you head-in-the-sand so-called progressives are just as close minded as the most rigid righties. How about be honest for once, and admit someone with some national prominence expressed opinions you agree with and move on from there. Geez, grow up for chrissake.
Poor Katrina: outside of her celebrity career, she still sees herself as a visionary. What a hoot.
Don't hold your breath, because it's not going to happen under the Obama Administration. We'll have to stop voting for either Democrats or Republicans and create and vote for a viable third party that will make the emergence of a genuinely progressive bench possible. Inotherwords, the only way to really counter the rightwing political machine is to change our system and our society.