Change Congress founder Lawrence Lessig -- with whom I work on campaign finance reform issues -- announced a new TV ad on Friday shaming "Blue Dog" leader Mike Ross on the public option.
In the ad, Keith Olbermann calls out Ross for his special-interest contributions -- and then recent poll numbers show that Ross is siding with those interests against his own constituents.
It's caused quite the buzz. Within hours, it was covered by NBC, ABC, Politico, Huffington Post, The Young Turks, Roll Call...and Rachel Maddow.
In addition to calling out Ross on the public option, this ad gets to the root of the problem: our corrupt campaign finance system, calling for Mike Ross to support fundamental reform.
Lessig's announcement of the ad -- and Rachel Maddow's clip -- are below the fold.
Remember right after the Obama victory when everyone asked what the progressive movement's role would be in this new political world?
The big question for movement leaders was (and is) what to do when Obama goes weak on an issue like FISA when the progressive base really wants to love Obama. The environmental bill presents some similarly muddy water and a strong line of progressive activism isn't obvious.
Fortunately, the public option is not muddy at all. It appears to be one big sweet spot for progressive activism -- with movement actors fighting on Obama's side (and on the side of 76% of Americans) against lame corporate Democrats who are standing in the way of Obama's agenda.
Better news -- progressives aren't missing this opportunity! We're going for it! We're fighting hard and strategically. Check out these five TV ads by movement actors. (And if you want to be part of the action, take out $20 and help fund whichever one you like best.)
Over at Huffington Post, Professor Lawrence Lessig (whom I work with in advancing public funding of congressional elections) gives people something constuctive to do with the anger over last week's bankruptcy vote:
If you think special-interest influence in Congress perverts our public policy, last week saw an outrage that vindicates that belief entirely.
Sen. Dick Durbin offered a bill that would allow families at risk of losing their homes -- but with an ability to pay their mortgage if their monthly rates were lower and extended over more years -- to legally get that option.
The very banks that taxpayers kept alive with billions in bailouts had the audacity to spend millions lobbying Congress to oppose this bill. They also showered politicians with campaign contributions.
The bill was defeated. Senator Durbin declared that banks "frankly own the place." Will you continue to support politicians who support this corrupt system? Or will you demand that any politician you donate to support reform?
Thousands of people are telling members of Congress they won't get a dime from us unless they co-sponsor Senator Durbin's Fair Elections Now Act to overhaul congressional campaign financing. It would replace our broken system with citizen-funded elections, a hybrid of public funding and small-dollar donations.
Already, our strike has withheld over $1.25 million from politicians (based on contributions last cycle). It's also been featured by ABC, NBC, the Associated Press, Politico, Huffington Post, and others.
Now is the time to send politicians a message that we absolutely demand they change the system.
I sense that a lot of people are sick of just venting. And are sick of the current system. Wanted to make sure you saw there is a campaign you can tap into to fix it.
Last week, Change Congress pulled together over 50 national and state progressive bloggers and reformers on an "open letter" to the DSCC and DCCC -- calling them out for an embarrassingly fake nod toward combating special interests...adopting Barack Obama's fundraising rules for 1 day.
Stephen Colbert nailed the connection between special-interest campaign contributions and results in Congress (in a way only he could).
In the process, he also nailed Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), who Colbert accuses of selling out to the Payday Loan industry for a mere $10,000. Gutierrez dramatically watered down his "Payday Loan Reform Act" in a way that will make the Payday industry billions -- at the expense of the little guy.
It was a smart investment for the Payday industry. But it's horrible for our democracy.
Colbert's segment basically made the case for why Congress needs to pass the bipartisan Fair Elections Now Act, which would put in place public funding of congressional elections (while still allowing Obama-style small donations, matching them four to one).
Check out the Colbert video for yourself on the Change Congress website by clicking here. On that page, you can also take action to get Congress to pass this crucial reform bill.
(If you want to help spread the reform message to others, share this post over email, Facebook, or Twitter. #gutierrez #politics #money. Disclosure: I work for Big Reform group Change Congress.)
I know as well as anyone that some emails that you expect to work simply flop. Others that you expect to be par for the course go gangbusters -- inspiring droves of activism. Innovation and creativity are key, so I'll never fault anyone for trying weird, wacky new things -- even if they fail.
With one caveat: Every activist email must have a plausible "theory of change." People should see some concrete theory about why taking action could lead to a desired result.
But some people choose to inflame people's passions just to get their email addresses (and, more likely than not, to fundraise from them -- as opposed to later engaging them in quality activism). This sullys the online activism process for the rest of us.
That's why getting emails like this one from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee recently was both insulting and maddening:
Dear Adam,
First they counted the votes. Then they recounted them. Then they painstakingly went over every disputed ballot by hand. It was the most thorough and exhaustive recount process Minnesota has ever seen.
It's time to give it up, Norm. President Obama needs Al Franken in the Senate. It's time to concede the race. Click here to add your voice.
First the bipartisan canvassing board declared Al Franken the winner of the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota.
But Norm Coleman didn't like that result, so he took it to court. And now when even his own lawyers are predicting he'll lose, Coleman's threatening to keep appealing to more and more courts.
How many more recounts does Norm Coleman want? How many more delays? How much longer will the Republican Party hold Minnesota's Senate seat hostage?
Coleman can end it today and give Minnesota the two Senators it's entitled to. But he's not going to give up unless we convince him to act. So let's speak with one voice and tell Norm Coleman it's time to go.
It then links to a page with a "petition" to Norm Coleman. If you sign, you land on a donate page. If you scroll to the bottom of the email, you also see a donate button -- and a tell-a-friend button, so the DSCC can get your friends' emails.
Nowhere in the entire email is there a theory for why a DSCC petition to Norm Coleman will make any impact.
And, if you think about it, why on earth would Norm Coleman listen to the DSCC? Can you think of a less credible messenger than the DC committee whose sole role is to defeat Senate Republicans like Coleman?
I'm not saying the DSCC has no role to play in getting Coleman to step down. I'm just saying they should play an honest and effective role.
Last week we launched Change-Congress.org. After that event, I made my first call on a Member of Congress, to ask him to join. I knew he was a supporter of at least some of our ideas. I had come to many of my own ideas about how Congress needs to change after long conversations with him.
I am very proud to announce today that Congressman Jim Cooper (TN-5) (Dem) has become the first Member to join the Change Congress movement. (He supports planks 2, 3, and 4). Congressman Cooper is a "blue dog" Democrat.
http://campaign-archive.com/ar...
I am not sure how I feel about this. More below the jump.
At yesterday's Change Congress event with Larry Lessig, Lessig presented the meme behind the campaign. Change Congress has four parts:
No PAC or lobbyist money
An End to Earmarks
Public financing of campaigns
Congressional Transparency
As with Creative Commons and copyright holders, Change Congress candidates and citizens can sign up for any and all of these pledges, matching their ideology with their pledge. It's a brilliant organizing structure. One suggestion I made was to bake national security into the dialogue upfront. Here's the question I asked Lessig, which Micah Sifry has kindly written up.
Q: From Matt Stoller, who discloses that he's done some consulting for the Sunlight Foundation. The hardest nut to crack is national security policy. Is it legitimate how secretive that is? What will you do when this movement bangs up into that wall? If everything else is transparent, then a lot of important decisions will be pushed into the national security arena.
I don't know. I do know that if earmarks were banned, that would remove some of the pressure for special deals, in the first place. I don't know how we'll deal with transparency in secret expenditures. I think there's a lot for me to learn, Lessig admits.
Several defense intelligence agencies will withhold unclassified information about their contracts from a new public database of government spending....
The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA) argued that online disclosure of their unclassified contracts could present an operational security vulnerability.
This is not classified information they are talking about. These departments are simply arguing that the public does not have a right to get unclassified public information. National security cannot be an absolute trump card against transparency, or else you'll get hugely ramped up spending on intelligence contractors where there is none. More fundamentally, every growing pot of money in the Federal government is basically in DHS or the Defense Department.
The Change Congress movement, and the progressive movement as a whole, needs to grapple with this question. When half of discretionary government income flows through the Pentagon, and black box budgets are growing on Capitol Hill, it's unavoidable.
Intellectual heavy Larry Lessig is launching his Change Congress initiative today at 1:30pm ET at the National Press Club. It will be webcast here. One thing Lessig has noted in discussing corruption is that, unlike most disciplines, there are no truly natural forums to discuss the problem because it is so abstract.
Lessig will further his mission by launching a new "Change Congress" project in a Sunshine Week lecture sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation and Omidyar Network.
In this lecture, Lessig will describe his decision to focus his academic interests on the issue of the systemic corruption of American democracy. He will explore the ways in which our democracy is threatened by corruption and ways we, as citizens, can respond.
Lessig's presentation is being sponsored by the Sunlight Foundation. I consult for the group, it is a newish organization dedicated to transparency in Congress. Lessig's focus on this area is a huge validation for the progressive movement, and hopefully he'll integrate civic engagement, lobbying, and transparency in an interesting and useful framework.
