A New Way Forward

by: Mike Lux

Wed Apr 08, 2009 at 10:25


I agreed this week to become an honorary co-chair of A New Way Forward, a spontaneous grassroots movement that is reminding me of the early days of MoveOn.org.  This impressive group of passionate organizers got involved because they were listening to progressive economists and business leaders talk about alternatives to the Geithner plan on re-building the banking system, and they decided to get involved.  Some of these organizers are old hands like Joe Trippi (who truly is an old hand - I met Trippi when he was helping Walter Mondale in Iowa in 1983, and he already seemed like an old hand then) and Zephyr Teachout of Dean campaign fame, and some are relative youngsters like Tiffiniy Cheng.  

I agreed to become a co-chair in part (of course) because I strongly support the principles for banking policy that they have laid out - the same ones supported by all of the economists and economic policy thinkers I respect the most, people like Paul Krugman, Dean Baker, Joe Stiglitz, William Greider, Simon Johnson, Jamie Galbraith, Leo Hindery, and Rob Johnson.  But I also agreed to help because the spontaneous passion and obvious organizing skill, completely unsupported with money or institutional DC help, reminded me of the early days of MoveOn.org.  Before there was ever the online organizational giant of MoveOn.org, it was a simple internet petition written and put online in the living room of Wes Boyd and Joan Blades and forwarded to a few of their friends.  Wes and Joan didn't know anything about how Washington, DC works, or how a PAC operated, or how a poll was conducted.  They didn't have any money or institutional support when they started, although a few of us in DC recognized their potential and lent a helping hand.  All they had was their passion about an issue (in that case, the impeachment fight) and great instincts about online organizing.  

While A New Way Forward does have some old hands at online organizing involved, their spontaneous passion about their issue and their creating a protest with national implications with no financial or institutional support reminds me exactly of MoveOn.org's launch 11 years ago.  It also reminds me of the practically spontaneous mass street demonstrations done in 2005 on the immigration issue by prominently young Hispanic organizers mostly driven by text messaging.  

One of the reasons I am so excited about A New Way Forward is that this approach to organizing a campaign around the banking issue is exactly what is needed.  Traditional DC organizations were always going to be reluctant to get into this fight.  For one thing, very few DC organizations work on banking and finance issues.  For those that do, they are deeply engaged in working with the White House to get the budget and health care reform passed, and don't want to throw cold water on that White House relationship.

Here is the information about the April 11th rallies.  I will be speaking at the one in DC, but please don't let that discourage you from coming.  My message will be simple: I support Barack Obama, support his budget and his agendas for health care and climate change and immigration reform and the Employee Free Choice Act.  But on banking policy, we need A New Way Forward.  

Mike Lux :: A New Way Forward

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
A New Way Forward | 30 comments
Great work, Mike. (4.00 / 8)
Thanks for what you are doing.
Indeed (4.00 / 4)
Well done.

Here's what I'd like to know: what economists are involved?

Relatedly, I wish Krugman, Stigltiz, Baker and all the other prominent economists who are individually shouting from the rooftops about the horrors of Geither's plan would join forces, present a plan, hold a press conference--you know, become activists. That would get some attention.

[ Parent ]
Woo, hoo! (4.00 / 1)
Excellent news, Mike (0.00 / 0)
There's not a rally scheduled where I live, but I will be following it on the various blogs, including OL.

tying banking solutions to the unemployment crisis will be powerful (4.00 / 3)
Thanks for your work on this, Mike.  Since the lunatic financiers and out-of-control bankers are largely to blame for the now 13.2 million unemployed -- and the 11.1 million more underemployed and "marginally attached", a total of 24.3 million Americans -- a real fix to the banking system must also address the need to put America back to work.

We need a banking policy that helps create tens of millions of good jobs.  We need a banking policy that is based on the real economy.  Linking these two core issues -- the banking crisis and the unemployment crisis -- will, I think, be a powerful message.

Not Ideas About The Thing, But The Thing Itself -- Wallace Stevens

well that's me answered (4.00 / 1)
i had wondered how we were going to push for this, and here it is. great stuff.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.
Great! (4.00 / 3)
This is precisely what we need lots more of if we're going to get where we need to be.

I'm more convinced than ever that we need a much more vibrant movement from below to get the sort of major changes this time around that we got with FDR, or any of the other eras you cite in your book.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

As I believe Obama said himself ... (4.00 / 1)
change is not gonna come from with in DC .. it has to come from outside ... that means we have to force Reid(and by extension .. tools like Blanche Lincoln & Michael Bennet) and Pelosi's hand
[ Parent ]
I Don't Believe (4.00 / 1)
We need to force Pelosi's hand that much.  She needs us to help her do what she's already inclined to do.  She's at least 2 standard deviations more progressive than Reid & the rest of the Dem leadership.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3
[ Parent ]
A New Way Forward to a New Political Party? (0.00 / 0)
Good move, Mike!

The most spectacular accomplishment of the New Way Forward campaign and its website is the strategic design behind both.

First, they have a compelling mission that reflects the views of a majority of the American people as to what should be done, as well as the recommendations of economists and policy analysts who understand the depths of the crisis.

That mission, according to their website, is to:

a) Nationalize temporarily the insolvent banks;
b) Reorganize the banks by removing their CEOs and board members;
c) Decentralize the entire banking system by breaking up the existing banks and selling them back to the private market backed by strong regulatory and anti-trust provisions.

Second, the website gives grassroots activists everywhere in the country everything they need in order to organize and hold their own event at the appointed time and date.

This is a path-breaking effort to spark a spontaneous nationwide grassroots movement inspired by a "who's who" of the most sophisticated web-based political activists and technologists in the country. (With Trippi and Teachout teaming up, I predict the ground is going to start to shake under our feet.)

What is most exciting is the political savvy behind the initiative: it is designed to empower autonomous activists to build their own local, self-organizing networks around opposition to the financial and economic meltdown caused by corrupt Wall Street financiers and their political allies in Congress and the White House.

All that said, however, even though the campaign is a spectacular and essential first step in catalyzing a nation-wide grassroots movement around a crisis that threatens the well-being of all Americans (except the wealthy), it is also clear, at least to me, that protests, demonstrations and petitions are not going to fundamentally change the current policies coming out of the Obama administration and Congress.

The only thing that is going to overturn the status quo and squelch the $12.8 trillion looting of the U.S. Treasury that Congress and Obama have authorized for the bailout is a new political party driven by grassroots voters who realize that nothing is going to change unless:

a) We replace the vast majority of Congressional representatives who keep selling out the American people because they are in bed with their corporate campaign contributors;

b) We elect a president in 2012 who is not beholden to the corporate special interests and wealthy individual fat cats who provided the lion's share of Obama's campaign contributions.

Trippi and Teachout and the whole list of co-chairs, counselors, elders and supporters know everything that is needed to spark the creation of a new political party by a coordinated online network of voters at the grassroots.

Let's hope that the April 11 demonstration provides the clarion call to the spontaneous formation by the American people and web-savvy political activists of a truly progressive political party that is driven by the voters instead of the financial interests that currently drive our major political parties and control our government.


Mike (0.00 / 0)
The immigration protests were spontaneous. Hiring you to run an organization funded by Leo Hindery (the big-money donor who bankrolled those Dean-morphs-into-OBL ads in 2003), is IN NO WAY, spontaneous. It's planned.

And whether what you're doing has value or not, it's an insult to the truly spontaneous grassroots (and mostly leaderless) organizing that erupted into those nationwide immigration protests.

I get that you're trying to capture that "spontaneous" vibe. Given you repeat the word four times in this post, it's clear you're desperate to associate it with your efforts. But it just isn't. Be honest about what you're trying to do and don't sit there and compare yourself to one of the great grassroots efforts of the decade when you are doing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what they did.

What's this post from Kos about, Mike? (0.00 / 0)
What does Leo Hindery have to do with A New Way Forward, if anything?

I thought you came on as honorary co-chair?

Is it not true that everyone involved with the campaign is a volunteer?

Who, if anyone, is being paid by Leo Hindery?

Please respond.

[ Parent ]
Actually (0.00 / 0)
I probably misspoke on Mike getting hired, since I misread that part of his post (somehow missed the "honorary" part). Still, my point that this isn't "spontaneous" is what I'm most focused on. The immigration protests didn't have a website to organize the protests. They were truly "spontaneous", as in they were essentially flash mobs, mobilized by SMS messaging, word-of-mouth, and last-minute radio appeals.  
[ Parent ]
Word Wars (4.00 / 1)
Thanks Kos for clarifying your misreading of Mike's involvement in the campaign.

As to what can and cannot be characterized as "spontaneous", the New Way Forward campaign does not have to be "spontaneous" in the same way that the immigration protests were in order to be labeled "spontaneous".

Since I am not associated with the New Way Forward campaign in any way, let me say that I think it exemplifies the potential for web technologies to be used by web activists to spark "spontaneous" demonstrations at the local level.

The way I see it, the New Way Forward campaign is not functioning at the present time as a top-down formal organization that is giving marching orders to subordinates at lower rungs of the hierarchy. It this were the case, then the local demonstrations would clearly not be "spontaneous".

U.S. citizens and voters have been so hamstrung by the takeover of the political system by the special interests that have bought the votes of elected representatives that most think it hopeless to buck the tide.

But web activists know very well how to use web-based mobilization tools to give seemingly powerless voters opportunities to coordinate at the national level the venting of their anger at the local level. I think this is the genius of the New Way Forward campaign. It is a web-based catalyst for coordinating the venting of local outrage regarding the financial and economic meltdown.

You, Kos, are certainly entitled not to consider this "spontaneous" when compared to the immigration protests. But it is quite "spontaneous" compared to the silence and passivity at the grassroots that accompanies each new outrage committed by the Obama administration and Congress relative to the crisis and bailout.  

BTW, a question for Mike and Kos: Who is Leo Hindery and what, if anything, does he have to do with the New Way Forward campaign?  

[ Parent ]
Leo Hindery (4.00 / 1)
Leo is a businessman and investor living in NYC, is very involved in Democratic politics which is how I am know him. He was John Edwards top economic adviser, and has been one of the few business leaders strongly on the right side (as far as I am concerned) of the trade issue. We co-authored an op-ed in The Nation the other day discussing the problems of the Obama economic/banking plans.
[ Parent ]
spontaneous (4.00 / 1)
I guess this is all semantics, but I think our definitions of spontaneous differ a little. Just because you have a website, or start organizing a few days ahead, doesn't mean you aren't spontaneous. Moveon at the beginning was, after all, a website.
I was contrasting New Way Forward, and the beginning of Moveon, and the incredible work of those immigration activists to those well funded astroturf, institutional campaigns DC is so used to.
[ Parent ]
Huh? (4.00 / 1)
Not sure what the hell you are talking about, Kos. I am getting no money to join this effort, and was the not the one who organized it. I heard about what these folks were doing, was impressed that people I respected like Greider were involved, and called up about 4 days ago to ask what I could do to help, and have neither been offered, nor asked about, any compensation for myself. As far as I know, it is spontaneous, if it's not that is news to me.
If Leo (who is a friend of mine) is involved, he has not told me that, either, and no one else has mentioned it to me.
You should check out your facts before making wild, and in this case utterly untrue, accusations.  
[ Parent ]
There is No Money Involved (4.00 / 1)
This is Donny from A New Way Forward. Just to clarify, I have no idea who Leo is. Never had any contact with hi, Don't know the name. There is absolutely no funding involved in these protests. None whatsoever. Tiffiniy Cheng and I are paying for all the permits etc. out of pocket. Kos, I haven no idea where you get this idea. Btw, is Kos Markos of DailyKos?

Here's the quick back story: Tiffiniy and I, while watching economist Simon Johnson on the Bill Moyers show, thought that Obama needed a strong message from the public (stronger than a petition) that the public wants an end to bailouts and that we support breaking from the power of the mega-banks. As individuals, we have been involved in online organizing before and made the site using open-source software we built as part of a previous project -- the Eyes on the Prize campaign. We built the ANWF site about one month ago. Since then we have been making connections with people like Zephyr Teachout, Mike Lux, William Greider etc. for help in organizing and outreach. Here's an article with a long interview with Tiffiniy, and a picture of the two of us:

http://www.wiretapmag.org/stor...

Kos, I'm curious where you got your theories about what we are doing. They are wrong. If you want to call me and chat about it, feel free: 413-320-8783.

[ Parent ]
But why during Passover and a day before Easter? (0.00 / 0)
Why attempt a national demonstration during these times.  Holidays are always a tough period of time to mobilize people.  
But why during Passover and a day before Easter? (0.00 / 0)
Why attempt a national demonstration during these times.  Holidays are always a tough period of time to mobilize people.  
Help me to understand. (0.00 / 0)
My message will be simple: I support Barack Obama, support his budget and his agendas for health care and climate change and immigration reform and the Employee Free Choice Act.

Even if EFCA passes just as the unions ask, what good will it do people if companies are free to move jobs out of the country?   It is how we got here in the first place.   Ronald Reagan said, companies are not your enemies.  Cut them some slack, and you'll see.  What we saw is that companies were already threatening unions.  Cutting them slack, only let them sell out American jobs at their own pace.   They said to the unions do as I tell you or we will move ______ (down south or out of the country)and take our jobs with us.   Since the unions have no real answer to that, just how will the unions that form under EFCA stand up to that pressure?  We have a problem with trade and VATs, and we have a problem with outsourcing and H-1b visa abuse.  Do you really think that EFCA, even ideal, is going to fix the labor problem that this country is having?  

Because the biggest area of potential growth (0.00 / 0)
is in service industries (like janitors or hotels) that you can't move overseas.

I don't know anyone that thinks that EFCA will solve everything. I know I don't. But creating strength in areas where the work must be done in the country will help deal with the problems you mention.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
I apologize for shooting the messenger, but.... (0.00 / 0)
We are going to replace high wage union jobs in factories, high wage, high skilled jobs in manufacturing, and all of the offshored, high wage IT and other high end jobs like engineering, by unionizing janitors and maids?   Solve everything, it won't solve anything.  It will keep the majority of people in this country poorer and the US cost of living higher.  Hell, we could even unionize dry cleaners, taco bell - the list is endless on places we can drive up costs for low and unskilled labor and charge everybody more for basic services.  Then we can add in all of the savings from not having to send kids to college; and eureka, we have more of the dismantling of the middle class and America.   If this is the best the Obama administration and the unions have to offer, no wonder this country is bankrupt.  This is exactly why I quit giving to progressive causes.  They are so willing to sell out, they make the return on my investment of time and money totally not worth it.

EFCA is as pathetic as Jane Hamsher and emptywheel having to "rally" people to stop bailed out Chase from driving Chrysler into bankruptcy and losing this country another 300,000 jobs.  Where the hell is Obama on this and why isn't he protecting taxpayer investments?  Why should people have to push Obama into protecting taxpayer investments?   What a waste he is.  

With a decent minimum wage, janitors and maids wouldn't need a union.  If EFCA is a measure of the progressive movements efforts to repair and save the middle class, no wonder we have Clinton back in the White House and Wall Street in charge of the Treasury.  

[ Parent ]
Missed the point (4.00 / 1)
Those jobs already exist. They have replaced many of the other jobs - jobs that we call high paying but in the past were not. Because there were no unions. Any why did that happen? Partly, because unions were weakened. That's why strengthening unions in one sector can help in other sectors.

With a decent minimum wage, janitors and maids wouldn't need a union.

Unions do more than impact wages. I think those folks would disagree with you. And it is their right, after all.

You're basic premise is that if wages go up for low wage people, it hurts the middle class. That's not true, not is is progressive. Unions shift how profits are distributed, and when they are more broadly distributed, it helps the economy grow in a healthy fashion and builds up the middle class.

Again, why do you keep talking about all or nothing? That's not how politics works. The question is, can EFCA, from both a policy and political standpoint, be building block towards the change we need. I think the answer to that question is yes. I think that regardless of any assessment of what Obama wants or will do (which is an odd way to judge a policy.) I'm not sure what question you are trying to answer.


Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
They haven't replaced those jobs, (0.00 / 0)
they displaced those jobs.   If they had replaced them, they would already be paying the same wages and benefits as the old ones.  

If there are no high end jobs left and everybody is making unionized minimum wage, then they have effectively cut the income/standard of living of the middle class.

First we had one wage earner per family.  Then they wanted two wage earners per family.  Now they want two 50 hour week wage earners per family and with mandatory insurance premiums instead of healthcare.    In return for all of this, we are suppose to be greatful for EFCA and universal health care?   You've got to be kidding me.  We get ripped off, and we have to barter for EFCA so we can start all over again because that's politics?   What a joke.

[ Parent ]
Displaced is a better word (4.00 / 1)
But who said you should be grateful? Who said, again, that EFCA alone is what we should be interested in?

Also, who said we should barter? I think it should be forced on Democratic politicians by activists and voters, just like all the other things we support (like green jobs, which have the potential to do a lot more to build a strong economy and middle class.) Successfully demanding things of the government gives people a taste for more. Successfully enacting progressive legislation shows politicians that there is political advantage to be had from doing so.

There is no starting over. Those jobs are there. Pretending that they are not won't help. Acknowledging where we are today doesn't mean we should accept any particular state of affairs - indeed ,we shouldn't.  And the old manufacturing jobs were not high end until unions and government policies made them so (was that also "unionized minimum wage"?) There is no reason the same could not happen to jobs that today are low wage and low status.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
No, it was technology that led to advanced (0.00 / 0)
manufacturing and higher profits, which led to higher wages of which unions were also benefactors.

I don't "accept" those "jobs".  Are we spending billions in retraining for people to work at taco bell?  how many nurses can we possibly employ?   Green jobs are great, but the de-industrialization of this country cannot be replaced by dry cleaners, and I don't believe for one minute that "green jobs" will adequately replace the manufacturing jobs that have been displaced, by Democrats I might add.  The stimulus bill refers to weatherization work as "green jobs".  You can call a garbageman a sanitation engineer, but he is still a garbageman.  

I have no faith in the "way forward" or any of the so called activist groups anymore. They are still supporting Democrats, who give nothing back in return.  Unions are the biggest dupes.  Until they decide they've been used and abused enough by both parties and find a stick, they are wasting their time imo.  

 

[ Parent ]
Really? (0.00 / 0)
No, it was technology that led to advanced manufacturing and higher profits, which led to higher wages of which unions were also benefactors.

Usually, the assumption is that technology displaces workers.  And generally, the level of profits doesn't drive wages.

Any links? I'm skeptical.  My own thinking is along the line of this:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...

Oddly, your position seems similar to the neo-liberal one (profits have a direct relationship to wages.)

I don't accept that the US should give up on manufacturing. I just don't see how protecting the rights of those outside of manufacturing is inconsistent with rebuilding manufacturing in the US.

For the record, I was talking about a real Green New Deal (energy creation, transportation, etc.) I'm not against those weatherization jobs, but that's not what this is all about for me.



Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
This crisis is extremely serious (0.00 / 0)
Hey Mike, good for you !

I think that "A New Way Forward" is a brilliant
idea. And I am certainly going to be at their
San Francisco protest this Saturday.

For those who want to know more, here is an
interview with one of the (volunteer) founders:

http://www.alternet.org/workpl...

Regarding our financial crisis, I've been
reading about it obsessively. The 2 articles
that I would most recommend are:

The Quite Coup

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc...

The  Bill Moyers interview with Bill Black

http://www.alternet.org/workpl...

This crisis is extremely serious.
We need to educate ourselves, and then
get organized (much more important than
arguments over semantics).

Saturday's protests are a good first
step, but of course we'll have to do more...

Great Work! (4.00 / 1)
I will be at Union Square on Saturday and hope others will be too.  While this is only a first step-one which will probably not make enough of an impact to force substantive change- it is a very promising one and should get us thinking about what is required along these lines.

A couple of reactions/questions on this point:

1) While there are some organizational/institutional endorsements, there aren't enough for this to attract the kinds of numbers we need.  In particular, the unions (if not nationals at least lots of locals) will need to sign on if this is going to take off and be a meaningful expression of dissent.

2) While having it on a Saturday has some advantages, it also limits its impact in that it requires less investment from the participants and will be less disruptive of business.  It should be on a weekday, requiring that the participants take time off work-a de facto general strike, if on a big enough scale.

3) Related to this, the choice of Union Square in NYC is a bit baffling.  It needs to be on Wall Street-obviously.  Or, more specifically, it should be at 85 Broad St., the main office of Goldman Sachs.

4) 2-3 lead me to reinitiate my suggestion for a Friday, May 1 rally on Wall Street.  Not sure if anyone's arranging this, but the logic for it seems pretty compelling.   The resurgence of International Workers Day, and an awareness of what this means, will be a real indication that the pitchforks are coming out, and that Obama ability to "protect" the bankers has real practical limits.

A million workers shutting down Wall Street on May 1 would mean something.  That's the kind of thing we should be pushing for.

I know that's a lot to ask for, but it's what reality requires.

A New Way Forward | 30 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox