"Did anyone see any mass mobilization on this issue before the vote?" (4.00 / 1)

No!  I did not!

I didn't even realize they were voting on it today... and I was pissed 'cos I could have done my part with Voinovich...


REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 20:43:46 PM CDT

Exactly (4.00 / 1)

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

---

by: sTiVo @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 23:13:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

they have been taling about this issue (0.00 / 0)

for some time, its not like no one knew it would be voted on soon

whatever you think people owe you, that is what you owe people

---

by: eomonroe00 @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 09:28:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I guess it is too much to expect Democrats to act in the (4.00 / 4)

interests of the people they represent.  So we need a massive mobilization effort every time an important issue arises.  

The financial oligarchy controls Washington - I agree with Sen. Durbin.

RebelCapitalist - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.

---

by: RebelCapitalist @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 20:50:21 PM CDT

Me too. (4.00 / 4)

The big-money interests have too much sway.

If you haven't joined the "donor strike" in support of public financing of congressional elections, now's a good time. http://change-congress.org

Durbin is leading the bill we are rallying around.

---

by: AdamGreen @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 20:59:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Was it ever any different? (4.00 / 1)

I don't think so.

All it took for Lincoln to abolish slavery was the Civil War.

All it took for FDR to give us the New Deal was general strikes all over the country and the Red Menace in the wings.

All it took to get Civil Rights was a civil rights movement.

Time to get real.  Netroots + morality = not enough

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

---

by: sTiVo @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 23:22:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nice - well done (4.00 / 1)

I am going to have reread Chris, and then this again, before I decide if you're right.

But I wanted to say before I knew, that is this what makes openleft better than most sources of fact based analysis, and all sources of fantasy and made-up news.


Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

---

by: HousesofProgress @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 20:59:29 PM CDT

BINGO! (4.00 / 3)

There is so much work to be done that we cannot get trapped in the law of diminishing returns of trying to make the Old Guard more progressive. Perhaps even physiologically, they cannot be.

Rewind to the 70s when people were actively advocating a transformation of consciousness in mass society. We need something like that now.

---

by: Paul Goodman @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:04:13 PM CDT

But how do we pressure? (4.00 / 1)

In an earlier diary (sorry for not having the link) Chris talked about tracking legislation in committees and engaging the OL community in pressuring for progressive policies. There was widespread support among the OL community for this endeavor. However, what he was suggesting to take on is in fact a gargantuan task, especially when the scheduling of critical votes is difficult to ascertain. It seems to me that what you're proposing is a vast number of issue-specific groups that can monitor a narrow focus of policy issues. Isn't this what the liberal movement had in the 60s and 70s which led to a very fractured coalition? We have a representative government, not a direct democracy. If we can't get the right representatives, I see little hope for progress.

---

by: jeffbinnc @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:07:34 PM CDT

Great question. (4.00 / 2)

I wish there was an easy answer. If anyone has one, do tell.

I am actually not advocating a bunch of issue specific groups though. I spent months of my life at MoveOn as our Internet freedom campaigner, but was also doing media accountability work, and later pivoted to presidential stuff -- while my colleagues did Iraq, energy, health care, presidential work.

MoveOn's not an issue specific groups -- yet on Net Neutrality, we constructively engaged.

I wouldn't even call Free Press an issue-specific group. They do operate in the openness and media reform realm...fighting media consolidation, fighting for Internet freedom, working really hard for broadband expansion. But, like MoveOn, they adapt to the times. They pick the important fights at the moment.

So, I guess I do support more fighters in the ring. But I don't necessarily support silos -- and definitely not counter-productive territorialism.

We need more effective actors mobilizing people...and less bad organizing that sullies the entire organizing enterprise for the rest of us -- like the DSCC over and over again (including today).

Tear down the bad stuff, build new effective stuff. I guess that's the direction I'd go.  

---

by: AdamGreen @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:47:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

better know a district (0.00 / 0)

i love this idea that stephen colbert uses on his show, yet he does a five minute spot, we need something like that but with the spotlight on these guys 24 hours a day,

maybe a website devoted to each member of congress, where we use the paparatzi philosophy, to constantly watch these guys,

thats the only way i think, they will begin to behave,

as sirota mentioned in his post regarding the bill to not help homeowners facing foreclosures, when their is a law basically doing the same thing for vacation homes, elected leaders would not survive if everyone knew this-

whatever you think people owe you, that is what you owe people

---

by: eomonroe00 @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 09:38:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

not necessarily a contradiction (4.00 / 1)

this may just be my interpretation, but it seemed to me that Chris's point was that elections are not enough. and that's what you're saying too, isn't it? in a sense?

from your post - which i think is completely valid - and from the comments so far, what was missing today? awareness - even knowing that the vote was happening - and organization - getting people to take action. focusing only on winning elections will never provide either of those things. the Democratic Party won't either, mostly. you need something that exists independently of electoral politics, one function of which is to help make that awareness and organization happen.

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

---

by: tatere @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:18:24 PM CDT

Old School (4.00 / 2)

I know here at OpenLeft we're all devoted to wired, post-hippie, force-multiplier type political activism, but sometimes you have to take to the streets. How much success could we have turning outrage at the finance industry's capture of the political system into a big national street protest?

I know it would be hard to get coverage from most of the corporate media, but if the protest came close enough on the heels of the conservative tea-bagging fiasco, and was larger by an order of magnitude, I think it would draw some attention. This anti-cramdown vote might be the hook we need.

I would suggest a May 16 date, because it's a Saturday almost exactly a month after the tax-day protests, inviting a comparison between the two. We would need an organizational infrastructure (lacking our own cable news channel), but there's plenty of that kind of leverage and know-how across the liberal political landscape, and the netroots are certainly big and influential enough to get the ball rolling.

The biggest problem is focus; the discontent we're trying to express isn't yet aimed at any well-defined object. I think a pithy catchphrase might be just what we need, though. I humbly suggest the following:

"Break the Banks."

---

by: FearItself @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:27:05 PM CDT

I would suggest a November 30th date (0.00 / 0)

as it's the tenth anniversary of WTO.

---

by: glacierpeaks @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 23:11:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

a new way forward is supposed to do this (0.00 / 0)

I don't think protests work either without a proposal to do something that cramps their style. We need to protest an tell the public to withdraw their money from the bailed-out banks.  That would get their attention.  

The civil rights movement worked because it included economic boycotts as a threat.

---

by: Dameocrat @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 00:54:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Complete the Circle (4.00 / 5)

I've seen a lot of praise for Sen. Durbin today and a lot of complaints about the votes.  Like most, I didn't even know the vote was today.

While I agree we need to be more aware and more active promoting and pushing for this kind of legislation, what is really needed is to complete the circle.

Durbin should have engaged the netroots directly.

Why didn't Durbin write a diary at dKos?  Why not contact the leaders at MoveOn and try to elicit their help?

Our leaders need to realize the power that exists easily within their reach.  And if Senators we like don't count as "our leaders", we really need to elect much, much better Senators.  In fact, that is basically my point.

Now, I'm not suggesting we depend upon our elected officials to actually lead; we know that will never work.  But if we can get a handful to actually be engaged with us, completing the circle, we'll see much greater success.

Perhaps what we really need is to elect some of our own.  

---

by: Mark Matson @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:33:02 PM CDT

Great Question (n/t) (4.00 / 1)

Support a Pennsylvania Progressive for Governor - Joe Hoeffel

---

by: David Kaib @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 21:55:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Durbin spoke out on The Ed Show (0.00 / 0)

but it was last-minute: the night before the vote.

I think these first 100 days have been extra-difficult for Senator Durbin due to Illinois' not having party leadership in Springfield. No thanks to Blagojevich, I believe he's been the one initiating the Recovery and Reinvestmemt requests for Illinois. He, Sen Burris and Gov Quinn have finally gotten together to mark some progress for the state.

The problem with these 10-12 Dems is not new. On April 15 I sent e-mails to friends and family about the Democrats who voted to "bailout" the Estate Tax in opposition to Obama's preference. I had signed a group request to the senate committee chair, and then I decided to e-mail the 10 Democratic senators who voted for the Estate Tax "Bailout," and against Obama's budget plan!  He [Obama] wants to retain the 45% tax rate and the $7 million dollar threshhold, but these 10 senators joined all the Republicans to lower the rate to 35% and raise the threshhold to $10 million dollars. So, these few senators are becoming our target group, I'd say.

---

by: Books Alive @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 09:23:11 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I would say... (4.00 / 1)

Chris is incredibly frustrated at the whores in congress who sell themselves to the highest bidders.  I imagine his post was made out of that frustration.  

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 22:29:22 PM CDT

CB's implication is a telling point (0.00 / 0)

First, let's clarify where our friend went wrong:

1) The federal system, while certainly constructed to have a strong dampening effect on the forces of change, still has been a power base for the true Left and the true Right, and even some of the real extremes, at numerous points in American history. When you have Klanners in Congress, and Henry Wallace as VP, there's no way that you can say that the system shuts everyone out.

2) Don't forget lag times. Congress was somewhat to the left of most Americans in the 1980s, and certainly to the right of the country in mid-1990s, so there's always several years of lag time between change in the population, and change in the government.

However, what Chris implies is something that all Americans-regardless of political opinion-need to take to heart: that we have to find vehicles for change outside the political system itself. We need strong civic organizations, robust unions, and without question employee councils to push the agenda forward. Progressives are far too over-reliant on electing "The One" leader who will make change....and when he disappoints, we try to rationalize it away. Change is up to us.

Look at the New Right in the '70s. While much of their focus was of course on DC, many social conservatives were very active in pulling churches well to the right in social policy, while of course the upper echelons of the business community were pushing change via a number of channels, some of them having nothing to do with government.  

---

by: glacierpeaks @ Thu Apr 30, 2009 at 23:33:39 PM CDT

If The Financial Industry (0.00 / 0)

saw that MoveOn was organizing a massive boycott of offending banks, it would get their attention pronto.

A boycott should go beyond this cram-down business, to encompass protests about abuse of TARP money and excessive compensation in the financial industry.

---

by: bob h @ Fri May 01, 2009 at 05:38:53 AM CDT

Killing Snakes and Putting Out Fires (0.00 / 0)

Both Bowers and Green have hit on key and valid points.

For years progressives have been operation on emergency mode of jumping at the last minute and hopefully on time, when the powers that be start attacking the wellbeing of the population by initiating legislation which will weaken civil liberties, or threaten to reduce the rights and freedom of the population.

The specific methods to overcome such attacks, be it campaigns ran by various impromptu coalitions, whether email campaign, taking to the streets, phone campaigns, have a reasonable degree of workability, and in themselves should be continued.

However, all these efforts are scattered. People commenting in this very site have shown that they can't be in touch with everything that needs to be done, or things they would help with, if they only knew these things were afoot.

In any single week I run into several issues on which Congress or some government agency, or state agency  are taking action, and moving speedily in devising elements which intended to enhance the position of powerful interests, which are always accompanied with elements which will be harmful or restrictive to the freedoms of the population. The issues vanishes in a few weeks, and those affected have to endure it, because they didn't know in time, and weren't able to act. There are thousands per month of bills being introduced in the country.  There are also thousands of regulations issued by agencies based on passed legislation. Many of them are dangerous and restrictive.

Taking stock of where things have gone in the past 40 years, In my humble opinion, and personal observation, progressive causes have been skidding backwards in almost all fronts. Sure, there have been some important victories on some very visible issues. My opinion is that these were pretty much concessions to pacify the left; while more subtle and critical issues were passed quietly, and without attracting much public attention, such as the gradual take over of the country by Wall Street and the Financial Community. This victory alone puts the powers that be with a big running start on all other social and financial issues. They will carefully control how fast the economic recovery will take, and you can be sure they'll come out significantly wealthier than before the economic crisis. This is the way it has been over the last 40 years, which I could observe directly and historically before then, since feudal Europe.

What has been missing all along?

There has never been a permanent coalition, coordinating and systematically keeping tabs on ALL issues, of interest to the hundreds of progressive projects and organizations; a place where the public go and see the entire progressive national panorama in a single pace, under a coordinating organization.

I have been pushing the idea for a long time. I have also pressed various leaders on the left to start such coalition thinking they have the connections and a following, and large readership. But I haven't been very convincing. So I have had to do some souls searching and decided that without my own conviction behind such a project, it will probably never happen.

Therefore, I started what I call National Progressive Party (http://progressivecoalition.net/), and set up a web site for it, and I will do what I can to bring it about. I'm a one-man-band right now. But I am convinced that a well organized coalition with common priorities and calendar for issues, and time table and timely alerts for actions will go a long way towards advancing progressive causes.

A National Progressive Alliance, the viable solution.
http://www.openleft.com/diary/...

---

by: boldhawk @ Mon May 04, 2009 at 02:59:43 AM CDT