The Working Families Party Is the Rare Political Party That Is A Movement

by: David Sirota

Wed Sep 23, 2009 at 09:15


A few weeks ago, I wrote a newspaper column pointing out that traditional political parties are not the same as successful political movements because they are far more loyal to their own power than any kind of ideological/legislative agenda. If I would have had the space in that column, I would have put an asterisk in there, noting that there is one political party that is very clearly a successful movement - although that party, the Working Families Party (WFP), is not at all traditional.

In my most recent book, The Uprising, I devoted a whole chapter to the formation and operation of the WFP, and how it has used fusion voting systems in New York and Connecticut (once legal in every state in the nation) to build one of the most significant instruments of raw progressive power in America. What do I mean by "raw progressive power"? Not just an ability to ram progressive tax and economic policies through one of the most dysfunctional legislatures in America, but a proven track record of winning major elections. Check out this effusive New York Times story about what happened just last week:

Young and Active, the Working Families Party Shows Muscle in the Primaries

The still relatively little-known 10-year-old party had dispatched a small army in the weeks before the primary, selling voters on its candidates in the mayoral, City Council, public advocate and comptroller races.

Organizers knocked on 227,928 doors and talked to 62,112 voters, a party official said. On Tuesday, more than 350 workers were stationed throughout the city, most working for a day rate of $100.

Their efforts resulted in the party's best electoral showing yet. In the public advocate's race, the Working Families endorsed Bill de Blasio, a city councilman from Brooklyn. Coming from behind, he forced Mark Green into a runoff on Sept. 29, even though Mr. Green was the presumed front-runner based on pre-election polls and had already held the position.

In the comptroller's race, the party backed John C. Liu, a councilman from Queens, who won 38 percent of the vote, more than any other candidate, and will face the second-place finisher, David Yassky, a Brooklyn councilman, in the runoff.

Of the four incumbent council members who were toppled, three faced challengers supported by the Working Families Party.

These are not glamorous races - but they are where some of the most important policy is made. And that's exactly the WFP's formula - they focus their work not on glam or celebrity politics, but on the local races where the rubber hits the road.

Just as important, they have succeeded in a crucial task for progressives: Holding Democrats accountable once we help elect them.  From its inception, the Working Families Party has used the power of fusion to improve the lives of the non-wealthy - minimum wage, reform of the racist Rockefeller Drug Laws, tax reform, paid sick days and a groundbreaking Green Jobs bill, to name just a few.

What they have done on the state level in New York and now Connecticut has real lessons for the rest of us.

David Sirota :: The Working Families Party Is the Rare Political Party That Is A Movement
We need to hold the President and Congressional Democrats accountable to the people who elected him. Whether it is the fight for real universal  health care or reforming the broken financial regulatory system, progressives have learned the hard way that electing Democrats is not enough.  We have to work just as hard - and be just as strategic - about what happens after they win.

It might be tempting to think of the Working Families Party's fusion model as an anomaly that's only real in New York.  But that would be wrong. Connecticut Working Families is thriving, and there are WFP's a-forming in teh two other states where "fusion" voting remains legal (SC, DE). And just two months ago, the Oregon legislature passed a law re-legalizing fusion in that state -- the first time in nearly 100 years that any state has reinstated this voting system.

For years, liberal funders -- like the millionaires and billionaires who control the Democracy Alliance -- have put too much money and effort into electing Democrats, and not nearly enough into strategies that can actually shift the Democratic Party in a progressive direction.  The good news is that operations like Act Blue, Firedoglake, the Accountability Project and, yes, OpenLeft are working to change the progressive funding model, as are groups like WFP themselves.

And that really is the key: The more groups like the WFP build capacity, the more likely we are to see significant legislative and political results. Indeed, the WFP - despite flying under the radar and not getting lots of big D.C. headlines - is perhaps today's most encouraging model for achieving those results over the long haul. You don't have to look at its successes to know that - you just have to look at the intensifying vitriol being aimed at it by the right-wing. The fact that Big Money Republicans and Rupert Murdoch's media machine are now constantly railing on the WFP and trying to manufacture controversies about it shows how frightened the political establishment is of genuine progressive power.


Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
How do we spread fusion voting? (4.00 / 3)
I know part of the point of this post is that even without the fusion voting model we can use similar tactics- building outside-the-party power and pressuring local level Democrats and Republicans to be more progressive by delivering votes and proving the power of our endorsements.

But that being said, what are the chances of spreading fusion voting in other states, like Ohio, where I'm at right now (native New Yorker)?  I am just so impressed with how well the WFP manages to play the game for progressive values, and would love to see that model in every damn state and municipality.

Figuring out how to be a progressive college graduate transplant to Ohio:  http://citizenobie.wordpress.com/


Why not pass an initiative legalizing it in California? (4.00 / 3)


[ Parent ]
I used to canvass for the WFP... (0.00 / 0)
and the first campaign I worked was an attempt to spread fusion. It is an incredibly difficult process. It requires a lot more money than anyone seems willing to put in. Oregon recently pushed through some legislation to take steps in the right direction regarding fusion, but expecting Dems and Republicans to make big steps towards giving other parties more power is unrealistic.

Sadly, it seems unlikely that we will see fusion spread much soon.


[ Parent ]
It may be unrealistic to expect Dems and Republicans to want to give up their turf... (0.00 / 0)
But last time I checked, there are many things that should have been long dead by now, like the public option.

I also remember that a proposition to legalize Fusion was put on the Massachusetts ballot a few years back. It was rejected, but it wasn't for lack of trying.

My point is, with a lot of public pressure and activism, the results may surprise you.  


[ Parent ]
As a fellow Ohioan, let me say "hello." (0.00 / 0)
Hello!  I'm in Cuyahoga County.  Which part of the state do you live in?  I'd like to help form a Progressive Party chapter, but my political contacts are not inclined to break from the Democrats for the usual excuses.  I've considered the Greens, but their organizational methods are ineffective (they're a good example of why Mr. Rosenberg's proposed methods won't work).

Send me an e-mail, if you like.  I'd be happy to discuss options.



[ Parent ]
Here's hoping the anti-ACORN folks don't campaign against WFP (4.00 / 1)
WFP was started in part by ACORN people, and I'm hoping that the anti-ACORN campaign doesn't turn into one against WFP too. These really are the closest people we have in the US to real movement-based political parties the way you might see them in other parts of the world (like let's say Bolivia or Brazil or parliamentary Europe).

Great post (4.00 / 3)
I'm a registered Dem in NYS, but always vote WFP. They're effective and hard-hitting.

Get your copy of The Progressive Revolution
Me on Facebook

Me on Twitter


Same here... (4.00 / 1)
I'm a registered Democrat too, but only to vote for WFP candidates in the primaries. In the General, it's WFP or die.

[ Parent ]
Hmm, I'm not that informed about the WFP's activities, but... (0.00 / 0)
.. I remember criticism that the WFP engages in misguided bipartisanship, too. Don't they also endorse rethuglicans when they think the Dem candidate doesn't have a chance? Is this really helpful for changing the political landscape?
:-/

That's not misguided (4.00 / 2)
that's called "leverage"

[ Parent ]
Yeah, I know. Still, not helpful in the long run. (0.00 / 0)
Only makes people believe that some rethuglicans are supporting working families. Even though they do more harm than good. Imho such endorsements are creating a false balance, making it look as if a WFP endorsed rethuglican is as good as a real progressives. And that's utter nonsense.

Imho it would be better if the WFP wouldn't endorse anyone rather than supporting a right winger. This only results in making it harder for Dems to challenge the incumbent in the next election.


[ Parent ]
I'm not too familiar with WFP supporting Republicans (4.00 / 1)
So I could be wrong, but have there been cases where said Republican was actually moderate/progressive/not-a-douche?  Or were they primarily supported to punish bad Democrats?  Because if there were such Republicans we would want to encourage them to exist and proliferate.  I'd imagine it's easier for them to survive (if only briefly) at the local level.  But if they only support Republicans as a lesson to Democrats, I agree, that's a little more mixed.

Figuring out how to be a progressive college graduate transplant to Ohio:  http://citizenobie.wordpress.com/

[ Parent ]
I was too lazy to google it, but ok... (0.00 / 0)
..gladly Wiki has a good article on the WFP:
The party's main issue concerns are jobs, health care, education and energy/environment, and it has won notable policy gains at the city, county and state level by endorsing Democratic or Republican candidates through fusion voting.
...
Usually, the WFP endorses the Democratic Party candidate, but it has occasionally endorsed Republican Party candidates in Westchester, Nassau, and Erie counties, often as a strategy for spurring bi-partisan action on its policy priorities. The party's sometime-position at the balance of electoral power and the threat of Republican endorsement has allowed it to influence the politics of local Democratic candidates and the state Democratic party.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

That last argument is a bit weak for my liking, but, well, at least it makes some sense...


[ Parent ]
They have endorsed rockefeller Republicans in the past (4.00 / 1)
Rockefeller, despite the drug laws, was mostly both socially liberal and economically pretty liberal.  There aren't any Republicans like that left to support, who are newly running for office.

And of course there are turf tussles sometimes vis a vis WFP and the Dems

"Incrementalism isn't a different path to the same place, it could be a different path to a different place"
Stoller


[ Parent ]
WFP endorsed a repub in Westchester in exchange for min wage increase (4.00 / 4)
NIck Spano was the moderate repub incumbent; the GOP then controlled the NYS Senate by more than one vote.  The more progressive Dem Andrea Stewart-Cousins won the seat in a subsequent election.

Realpolitik sausage making, the upside was a substantial improvement in the lives of about a million low income workers.

There is no such thing as a free market.


[ Parent ]
Right, I think that's (4.00 / 1)
the story David covered in his book The Uprising.

[ Parent ]
What is the legal situation? (4.00 / 1)
Over the last few decades a lot has been changed legally to give the party bosses increased control of candidate selection and make it more difficult for third parties and dissident groups within parties, but I don't know the details.

The two party system is a reality that has to be dealt with (which is why I oppose the idea of starting a national third party), but it's not a good thing. Most of the progressive energy since the Civil War has come from third parties, independents, organized dissident groups within the parties, and non-party movements such as the civil rights movement.

It's the stranglehold of the two party bureaucracies that traps us into constant lesser-evil choices. Obama and Rahm are playing that to the hilt -- at the very time that THEY are sucking up to creeps like Grassley, they're telling us that if we don't give them blind support, we'll be to blame when the Republicans win.

But anyway, I do not have the capacity to research election law (especially regarding primaries and third parties) state by state or to do an overview of the history, but it's something I'd love to see.  


Thanks for the information! (4.00 / 1)
Between the WFP and the Progressives in Vermont and Washington, there is enough evidence to debunk the notion that an outside political organization would harm rather then help.  (Wisconsin's version of the Progressive Party in Dane County is another good indicator that a successful third party-based movement can achieve results within a reasonable time frame.)

As I've pointed out, third parties - when used properly - can be and are being used to help drive Democrats leftward.  As long as progressives learn lessons from these organizations, we should be able to extend these efforts nationwide.



Progressive Dane = New Party DNE Progressive Party (0.00 / 0)
Speaking from much first-hand experience in Dane County (Madison area)...

The New Party chapter, called Progressive Dane, had some earlier success but has since petered out quite substantially.  Sadly, there has been a lot of internecine battling along the lines of a 3rd Party-Democrats battle.  Ironically, there's very little ideological space between the two here and the focus has been entirely upon Madison city council and Dane county board elections.  The battles have been about personalities and fights over the presence of a "competing" 3rd party.  

Progressive Dane and the Dane County Democrats did work together on most county board races and fought like dogs in city council races.  Odd combination - and the institutions really predicted cooperation (nay, even fusion).  

Today, neither local party organization enjoys much in the way of mass membership or mass participation.  Some elite squabbling still, but much less so than previously; because the Progressive Dane group lost a lot of vitality (and lost some big elections).  

But yes, there were results (if not sustained) for a time.  Is it a model for other party formations?  Probably not.  Because much of the work got bogged down in factionalism and battling in one institution, the "fusion" aspects in the other institution got lost.  What could have been never was.  Usually I can separate the structure and Institution from the execution; but in this case, I think that the latter was wrapped up in the former.  

If there is to be a new kind of party formation, I really think that it needs to include multiple-institution work (i.e. levels of races, e.g. city council to state legislature) and entertain a fusion-first approach (i.e. no direct competition with Democrats unless specifically called for).  


[ Parent ]
A Progressive Alliance (0.00 / 0)
I've been advocating a progressive Alliance (although I've used the word "party" initially), as a way to show numbers and flex political muscle.

The WFP has some of the strengths required to make important changes to the political system, such as "fusion" voting. I think, however, that after ten years in existence, we would have more states with fusion voting. Perhaps I'm a bit naive about the work required to accomplish it; but I do not see any activity towards it. (Maybe someone can point me to a national movement along these lines.)

The WFP, just like any other group, be it a party, or an alliance, or any of the various interest groups have the same problems of power conflicts as they take place amongst humans, so "party loyalty" or "group loyalty" and power conflicts will be unavoidable. Let's hope these will not distract a group from the senior objective of helping create rational public policy and laws. Thus, focus on the bigger objective can overcome structural and organizational flaws.

Nevertheless, David does point towards a viable direction, which makes sense supporting, and contributing to its speedier development. I think this kind of approach is worthwhile, and more conversation is warranted to streamline its workability.  

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


WFP is a corrupt tool of a corrupt Democratic Party (0.00 / 0)
Looks like this article came out just before the latest Working Families corruption scandal:

http://www.timesunion.com/AspS...

Sorry to break up the lovefest, but people who pay attention in NYS know that the WFP is just as dirty as the Dems that control it. Ballot fraud is only part of it.

WFP basically sells its ballot line to whichever Dem (or sometimes Repub) they see as most likely to win. After the election, they pull in the fat checks from political insiders.

If you think they're doing this to help progressive Democrats, you'd be wrong. This year WFP endorsed a lot of corrupt machine insiders in NYC, like Christine Quinn, against progressive grassroots challengers like Yetta Kurland. WFP has barely gotten a taste of power from its Democratic sugar daddies, and it's already rotten.

If you think they're trying to open the political system to more choices, you'd be wrong again. In Connecticut, WFP joined the Dems and Repubs to defend a blatantly discriminatory campaign financing law that gave Ds and Rs a permanent advantage. Fortunately, the judge didn't buy it and declared the law unconstitutional.

The escapades of the WFP, from ballot fraud to circumventing campaign finance laws to their pattern of deceit, doesn't surprise me that much. It's been a party for sale for the whole of its short, sordid history.

If you want a political party that is a movement, check out the Green Party, a global grassroots party based on nonviolence, social justice, grassroots democracy and sustainability. Greens are independent, progressive, and take no corporate money. http://gp.org







Donate to Open Left




blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
USER MENU

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search