A chance to get some of Corporate America's money into progressive hands

by: Mike Lux

Tue Aug 10, 2010 at 18:00


The ongoing economic downturn has made the politics of being in power very tough for Democrats and the White House. While the talking heads argue incessantly about the root cause of the recession, high unemployment numbers, stagnant wages, disappearing pensions and a growing deficit continue to drive poll numbers down for those with their hands on the levers of the economy.

However, one thing that gets talked about less is that it's also making life difficult for the myriad of non-profit and advocacy organizations that are trying to push a progressive agenda.

Foundation money, large individual contributions and small donor donations have all dropped off significantly since the recession began. Small, mid-size and large progressive groups are struggling to keep their staff and maintain their level of work...the exact moment when their advocacy and voices might be able to make the biggest difference in a generation.

I've spent a lot of my career helping build a progressive infrastructure that can move ideas, develop leaders, and push an agenda from the grassroots level...including founding and consulting with a lot of the organizations that are struggling right now. These are organizations that often times work behind the scenes but can be credited with helping lay the foundation for a wide range of progressive successes over the years.

But, the truth is that as hard as it is, sustainable organizations have to find ways to raise resources even when it's tough.

One example is an effort being led by a small set of progressive groups (including a couple that I helped start) that are taking a creative approache to funding their work this year. Led by the Center for Progressive Leadership, there is a group of 11 progressive non-profits who are joining together to compete for over $750,000 in funding in an online giving contest called Pepsi Refresh Everything.

While I ordinarily don't recommend contests like this to organizations I work with, Pepsi is giving away some serious money and the groups involved have a great shot at winning. Moreover, if it works, CPL is going to put together slates for every month throughout the rest of the contest (which could mean raising over $8 million for progressive organizations).

The groups on the slate include organizations that are working to mobilize young voters, coordinate progressive efforts at the state level, improve access to college, promote healthy eating, provide legal and advocacy support for low-income communities, and fight homelessness.  

It's important work that needs to happen, now more than ever. We need to focus on short-term policy successes but we also need to remember that this is a long-term game and we need the infrastructure in place to win it.

If you want to help, you don't have to donate any money. All you have to do is sign-up to be a daily voter for the Progressive Slate in August.

Daily voters receive a short email each morning in the month of August with a link where you can go and cast 10 votes each day for all the organizations on the Progressive Slate (that's what they're calling all of our groups working together).

It's a simple, easy way to get some corporate money into progressive hands.

Mike Lux :: A chance to get some of Corporate America's money into progressive hands

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

wouldn't it be better to pursue private donations via accomplishment (4.00 / 1)
as opposed to groveling for blood money?

also I need better breakdowns of what each of these groups does, and whether or not I can be assured they won't give money to Blue Dogs or "centrists"

also is this really more important than the Gibbs story?


Ha! (0.00 / 0)
Pitch perfect!

I literally laughed out loud.


[ Parent ]
I'd rather spend time supporting membership based groups (4.00 / 2)
Unless someone has f"£ked up somewhere (which IS possible), there is no way that Pepsi money will go to something that undermines the system that Pepsi depends on.

That's not to say it can't happen...just wary of this:  http://www.incite-national.org...


Mike never strikes me as an idiot. (0.00 / 0)


[ Parent ]
Do you disagree that PepsiCo (4.00 / 2)
has a product line that is unhealthy? Or that their plastic bottles are not an ecological disaster? Or that they make a lot of money by foisting the first things on the rest of us?

Do you really think they would support any idea or candidate that undercut their corporate "right" to keep pouring this hit down our collective gullet?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
I don't think they're afraid of us. (0.00 / 0)
I think they're perfectly willing to spend money on a promotion that might give money to people who hate them. I don't think they care. They're betting that nothing we do will matter. But it's like BP advertising on progressive sites: I'm all for that. I'd rather they spend advertising money on progressive sites than anywhere else.

And maybe I'm naive, but I trust Lux to have considered these issues deeper than anyone else on this blog with maybe two exceptions--and I'm not one of 'em.

I think your point is a fair one (wrong, but fair), but there's also a whole lotta purity on OL these days. Read the responses to this thread. You've got a false dichotomy, a 'look, over there!', a jaded dismissal, and a few investigations of fatalism.

Sheesh. It's not like Lux is saying we've gotta get PepsiCo tattoos. He's saying maybe we can spent 25 seconds a day voting to earn a few bucks for some good groups. I guess I'm a shallow sell-out, but I'm willing to shave 25 seconds off my porn-watching time. It just doesn't seem like such a terribly costly investment, full of dark echoes of political misdeeds.


[ Parent ]
To each their own (4.00 / 2)
I suppose it may be a way to take that "dirty" money andd try to "launder" it through support of positive initiatives.

But in the end, PepsiCo gets to use this support as a way to white-wash their public image. Is that a good trade-off? Probably depends on one's perspective.

I happen to think it is the small, easy steps that start one down the path that has lead to the corrupt and dysfunctional political system we have at the current time. No such thing as easy money, or support from corporations without strings.  

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
Isn't that the same (0.00 / 0)
thinking that says Gore a hypocrite on climate change because he flies in airplanes?

[ Parent ]
No (4.00 / 1)
Think of it this way:

Chevron has given mony for race equality work in the U.S. while engaging in some of the destructive things that oil companies do.
Reebok has given human rights awards while exploiting the f2£k out of people.
Pepsi is giving $750,000 in a marketing campaign, but I'll bet you a small sum it won't go to someone pointing out that soda companies are contaminating groundwater in India.

Individually, they are all engaging in a somewhat benign activity that is unrelated to their core business.  Collectively, what happens is that each gets good PR while cumulatively the funding stream of the non-profit industry is overly dependent on the generosity of the companies that are actually producing some (not all) of the problems in the world.  It also allows some of those problems to be addressed, but constrains how you address them.

What this means is that, structurally, the non-profit industry is overly influenced by money, by the interests of money, and by corporations.  Instead, imo, services should be provided by the government (state, local and/or federal) and organising and activism should be done through membership based institutions whenever possible - whether small or large, which are as indepedent of government or corproations as possible.

I'm not saying that in the world we live in we can avoid making compromises - living inside capitalism is one giant compromise that no one can ignore, even if they pretend they can.  What I am saying is that these kinds of compromises need to be entered into carefully and the costs and benefits weighed fully (i.e. a conversation like this is good) - which I think Mike would agree with since he said he normally doesn't recommend his clients enter contests like these.


[ Parent ]
Sure. I agree with all of that. (0.00 / 0)
It's pretty much what I'm saying.

In this situation, you can either try to do a little good via a compromise with a problematic system, or you can try to do that little good via imaginary services that should be provided by x, y, and z.

And my point is that I'm pretty confidence that Mike doesn't think that clicking a link for this money means my hands become irredeemably dirty.


[ Parent ]
compromise is not an option - it's inevitable (0.00 / 0)
But you can strive to undo the things that require you and everyone else to compromise - even if your timescale is 400 years.  That's my main criticism of Obama - he doesn't do that.  And so we get people like Gibbs saying that everyone from a liberal democrat like Mike to people who are radical Leftists are 'unrealistic' because they don't adhere to the idea that you have to sacrifice every shred of thinking to the neoliberal orthodoxy / pragmatism.

But there's still a range there and once you break from the powers that be and what they tell you - well the world is your oyster in terms of figuring out what you think should happen and how to get there.  You are still constrained because you live in human society, but you are free.  And you are also mortal and have only so much time on the earth.  So you have to think - is this the best use of my precious time?

And in this case, I think, no, it's not.  I would honestly rather sit here and talk to you than to help support a campaign that involves Pepsi getting street cred through corporate-democracy culture (i.e. twitter and reality shows and all that) and groups that are interested in getting that money that way rather than in the kind of grassroots mobilization that will generate its own resources or even a more beneficent donor like Soros.

Money is necessary - but ultimately, you can become enslaved to it if you don't break the addiction to it.  And I think the non-profit industrial complex is addicted to it, and that shows in how much or how little they can mobilize people.

And then we wonder why there's no grassroots pressure out there...


[ Parent ]
Nope (0.00 / 0)
Don't follow your reasoning, nor do I do think Gore is a hypocrit for that reason.

I think he's missing an opportunity to use his personal resources to demonstrate how one can reduce the carbon fuel usage in every day life. That's his choice. Imagine how powerful a message he could send by ditching his mansions and moving to a more reasonably sized residence, or deciding to travel the nation in a less wasteful and cleaner way than airplanes - especially if those are private jets. He, and others like him, could lead by example.

Same argument for $ from PepsiCo. If one really believes that corporate funding of our political campaigns is part of the problem, the fact that some might choose to lead by setting an example of not looking to corporations for $ should be supported, rather than spit upon.

"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."


[ Parent ]
he never strikes me as an idiot either (4.00 / 1)
i agree with some of what he says most of the time and almost always I appreciate the care with which he says what he has to say.  But one can still disagree with someone reasonable :)  If I didn't think people could be reasonable but have different perspectives because of where they're coming from, I wouldn't be further left than 'liberal' :)

[ Parent ]
lots of great groups in this set (0.00 / 0)
The groups supported in this slate are mostly not political, at least not in the standard sense: The Inner City Law Center (fighting slum lords in LA), SHARE Food Program (providing food assistance to folks who volunteer in their communities), Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio, etc. The more political are right up Open Left's alley, it seems to me: the Energy Action Coalition, the League of Young Voters, and others.

Check out the full list and descriptions at http://www.theprogressiveslate... and then sign up to help them out. Pepsi's giving their money to someone -- best it should be helping to build a better progressive infrastructure and helping great groups when it does it.

http://www.actblue.com/page/asaslist


I dunno, Mike (4.00 / 1)
Has it really come to this?  This is kind of like voting in the "Cutest Dog" contest.

Regardless, I've signed up.  I will try hard to be faithful to the effort.  I hope it pays off for the groups involved in the Progressive Slate.  Someone will get the $$, might as well go to some of these groups.


Doubt this will be very effective. (4.00 / 1)
This here is such a colossal turnoff:
"you will receive a short email reminder each morning"

Yeah, like I really want that.

And do I really want to be "one of several thousand individuals" engaged in the "Pepsi Refresh Everything" effort?

Mike, I have much respect for your posting this but I see no similar successful effort in marketing and fundraising that is similar to this, where you create an umbrella campaign around a diverse group of organizations and call it a "contest."

It's kind of like "See which relief group can get the most cash to help Haiti."

Why do people in progressive political fundraising always try to reinvent the wheel when there are so many already proven methods from the marketing and fundraising community?

It's terrible waste of time and money.

Sorry, wish I could be more supportive.

Try something like this or this.

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...


Wow! (4.00 / 2)
$750,000? That's what the Heritage Foundation spends on cocktail napkins.

Where do we sign up?


Yea, I know, the left is perfect. (4.00 / 1)
But I'm not always sure. I get requests for donations and I don't always know if these are legitimate groups or rip-offs by crafty entrepreneurs, fighting a good cause because it's a hell of a good gig.

There are three things I'd first like to know before writing a check:

1) Give me a list of your top five contributors. I want to know who I am getting in bed with.

2) Tell me the salaries of your top five executives. $100K I'd consider fair; $1M I would not.

3) If you are paying for outside management services (thus skimming off surpluses and funding $1M executive salaries), I want to know.


Jack Lohman

http://MoneyedPoliticians.net

http://SinglePayer.info


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox