(No time to let up now! - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)
Simply incredible. In 24 hours over 200,000 people have signed our Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) petition to MSNBC demanding they put Keith Olbermann back up on the air.
If you haven't heard the news, MSNBC suspended Keith without pay for gasp, donating to three Democratic candidates this cycle. As @TheShannonFiles tweeted:
I think they picked a bad time to fuck with the Progressive movement. We're a little pissed off.
(Ba-BOOM!!! Progressive victory. - promoted by AdamGreen)
Hey everyone, my colleague Stephanie Taylor at the PCCC sends along this post:
We did it!! No, wait...WE DID IT!!!
Just minutes ago, bold progressive Ann McLane Kuster defeated Joe Lieberman's presidential campaign co-chair Katrina Swett in tonight's New Hampshire congressional primary (NH-02).
Annie ran a superb campaign -- and netroots supporters in the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and Democracy For America made thousands of phone calls and chipped in nearly $100,000 toward her people-powered victory.
The PCCC was formed to achieve big progressive victories just like tonight's. Let's keep the momentum going!
Here's what Annie wrote to PCCC members yesterday:
The PCCC has been a great partner and has helped progressive candidates like me run effective, people-powered campaigns.
Phone calls from PCCC members to voters were a tremendous help. Many PCCC members donated $3, $4, or $10 as well, allowing us to continually expand our grassroots effort.
Thank you for being part of the "people power" that is changing this country. Your efforts are noticed and greatly appreciated.
Ann McLane Kuster is on her way to filling Paul Hodes' open seat in New Hampshire. Together, we're making a big difference. But all need to work together to continue winning progressive victories in 2010.
The PCCC will help Ann McLane Kuster defeat Tea Party Republican Charlie Bass in November, and help other progressive champs like Bill Hedrick (CA-44), Elaine Marshall (NC-Sen), and others.
Meet Katrina Swett. That’s her on the right. Why are we talking about her?
Well, the Democratic primary for New Hampshire’s open congressional seat is just 4 days away, and it’s neck-and-neck.
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee has endorsed bold progressive candidate Ann McLane Kuster, who is running against Joe Lieberman’s presidential co-chair Katrina Swett. Kuster and Swett met in a big debate Wednesday night, and Swett attacked Kuster for being the "very progressive candidate," saying, "The country is moving away from the more left, progressive point of view."
Seriously? Attacking a Democrat for being progressive in a Democratic primary? Swett’s attack is all you need to know about the type of Blue Dog she’ll be in Congress.
I just got off a media conference call with Google CEO Eric Schmidt and Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg.
They announced a new policy recommendation that would kill the Internet as we know it, if implemented by FCC Chair Julius Genokowski and other policy makers.
The old "wireline" Internet that will be irrelevant in a few years? We propose a "new, enforceable prohibition against discriminatory practices" on that.
New "wireless services" (aka the entire future of the Internet)? No equivalent nondiscrimination rules for that, but we'll "create enforceable transparency rules." That way, as Americans lose access to the free and open Internet, they can visibly watch it go away.
Just in case "wireless services" doesn't encompass the entire future of the Internet, a new class of "new services" is envisioned, which Schmidt and Seidenberg actively differentiated from "the public Internet." Basically, through private contracting, big corporations could deal directly with the Verizons and AT&Ts of the world to create the next YouTube, maybe dangle it without discrimination to the public just long enough for us to be hooked, and then discriminate like hell over it. But don't worry, the FCC will "monitor the development of these services."
Google, a company that I've long admired and currently hold thousands of dollars of stock in, just "went evil."
This letter was launched last week by 5 groups that use the Internet to organize millions of Americans around issues, and are now using the Internet to save the Internet itself -- Free Press, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, MoveOn, Credo Action, and ColorOfChange.
Why did Google cut this absurd deal, one that dramatically hurts its credibility in the online space?
Hi, folks. Stephanie Taylor, one of my PCCC co-founders, just sent out this email to our members.
She's on a plane, so I wanted to share it with the OpenLeft community which was such a big part of the Bill Halter movement experience:
Hey everyone,
Last night was a really tough night. You've probably heard by now, but Bill Halter lost the Arkansas Senate primary to Blanche Lincoln in a squeaker.
The Democratic Party establishment and the White House teamed up with big corporations to protect one of the most corporate-owned senators in America -- and they barely won.
Today in news reports, the political insiders are gloating. They're proud that they beat thousands of people fighting for change.
But what the political establishment doesn't realize is that the progressive movement built power in this election.
Bill Halter started nearly 20 points down. He wasn't taken seriously by most insiders. But he gave Blanche Lincoln the scare of a lifetime with the help of a vibrant progressive movement -- thousands of people who committed time, talent, and small-dollar donations in the fight for change.
We formed the PCCC last year to create a new model for supporting progressive candidates. This race was an important building block:
There are only six days left in the critical primary between corporate Democrat Blanche Lincoln and netroots challenger Bill Halter. Bill Halter has the momentum leading up to next Tuesday's vote. This race is a tremendous opportunity to deliver a knockout blow to corporate Democrats like Blanche Lincoln all across the country.
Yesterday, Bill Halter rolled out his closing ad from Arkansas retiree Pauline Wildman. Pauline depends upon social security for her livelihood. In the ad, she calls out Blanche's proposal to cut social security. True to her sellout ways, Blanche wants to cut taxes for millionaires, but isn't as concerned about preserving social security.
As progressive Rhode Island State Rep. David Segal announced on Daily Kos last Thursday, a coalition of progressives are using smart, strategic leverage to stand up for union workers.
Netroots Nation -- the annual conference of online activists and progressive thinkers, formerly known as "Yearly Kos" -- announced that they want to come to Providence, Rhode Island in 2011. That would bring $2 million of economic activity to the area.
But they're attaching one condition: The Westin hotel, where the conference would take place, just slashed worker pay by 20%. Netroots Nation insists that must be reversed.
Rep. David Segal is co-sponsoring the petition with Netroots Nation, RIFuture.org, and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. Segal will personally deliver the signatures to hotel management this week -- inviting the media to attend.
We're at 1,340 signatures -- can you help us reach 2,000 before the petition delivery? Click here to sign.
Nearly one year ago today, my life was changed by a blog post I wrote on OpenLeft entitled, "Profiles in Bad Online Organizing: Part 1 (DSCC)." In critiquing a DSCC petition to Norm Coleman, I wrote:
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:
[Email text here]
...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.
To make a long story short, based on positive feedback from this post, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee I co-founded with Stephanie Taylor and Aaron Swartz ended up doing the "Dollar a Day to Make Norm Go Away" campaign with Democracy for America -- fully backed by a theory of change. In addition to putting real pressure on Norm Coleman, it brought over $100,000 and thousands of members into our nascent organization. (Many thanks to the OpenLeft readers who participated.)
Everything we did to advance the public option in 2009 and everything we will do to elect bold progressive candidates in 2010 flows from there.
I've been meaning to return to "theory of change" writing -- and analysis of organizations that just don't get it -- for a while. But I just read a great post by Aaron Swartz on his blog Raw Thoughts that really is a must-read.
If you want to be an effective activist -- or if you want to understand why many thinkers and institutions in DC are ineffective -- I highly recommend you read Aaron's "Theory of Change" post in full:
Great news for "the left" -- Politics Daily's Jill Lawrence wrote us a memo!
Who is Jill Lawrence, you may ask. She is the prognosticator who declared three months ago, "It may be too soon to write a requiem for the public option, but I'm going to do it anyway..."
Surprise, surprise, she now writes, "Memo to the Left: The Public Health Insurance Option Is Dead, Get Over It."
I actually don't care that someone would question whether the public option is dead. Ezra Klein -- a smart guy -- wrote just last Friday, "The public option: Very alive or totally dead?" (He also wrote, "the story of the public option's resurgence has been a mixture of smart organizing and Senate cowardice," much appreciated by the thousands of folks who have been organizing on this issue.)
What I resent about Jill Lawrence's "memo" is that she engages in journalism without facts. Check out her main three arguments against progressives:
First, a public option could complicate passage in the House. Pelosi is trying to balance potential loss of support from anti-abortion Democrats against gains that may come from moderate "Blue Dog" Democrats who prefer the Senate bill. They like it in part because it has no public option.
I spoke with Jill Lawrence and she said this on the phone. I asked her point blank, "What yes votes turn to no votes because of the public option?" Her answer, "Well, I don't know the names."
I suggested she find them. Evidently, she couldn't. But she threw this unsupported argument out there anyway.
One could just as easily say some members of the House are more likely to vote for the bill if it has a public option. Unlike Jill Lawrence, I can name names. The Atlantic's Chris Good wrote about Rep. Scott Murphy (D-NY) -- a former "no" vote -- in his piece, "A Moderate Dem For The Public Option." When signing our House public option letter, Murphy said:
"Our nation's health care system is broken. To have real reform we need to ensure three things; accessibility, accountability, and affordability. I support this letter because the public option would help achieve all three of these goals and help to keep costs down by giving the American public a competitive option to private insurers."
Jill Lawrence's first point goes down in flames. But, she took two more stabs at it. Here's the next one:
Last night, on MSNBC's Ed Show, the PCCC and our partners at WhipCongress.com announced, "We can say with confidence that there would be at least 51 votes for the public option in the Senate if the House goes first" and then named names and revealed new information.
Ed Schultz called it "the best reporting I have seen anywhere on a head count of the public option." (Ok, ok, he hasn't seen Chris's awesome reporting...) Here's the video:
( - promoted by AdamGreen) Colorado Senator Michael Bennet’s bold stance in favor of using reconciliation to pass the public option has riled some feathers in Colorado conservative editorial pages. The Grand Junction Sentinal published an op-ed asking if he was “standing on principle when it comes to health care reform or is he playing to the political left.” In fact, Michael Bennet's stand in favor of the public option is good politics and good policy. According to a recent Research 2000 Poll, the people of Colorado support the public option 58% - 36%, including 59% of Independents. 18 senators, including members of leadership and committee chairs, have already signed on to the letter at WhipCongress.com calling on Harry Reid to use reconciliation to pass the public option.
As Chris wrote, tonight Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) shocked Wall Street and the DC establishment by announcing a "hold" on the nomination of Bush's Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke for another 4-year term at the helm of our economy.
This is huge. Wall Street will not be happy, and they'll go after Sanders with everything they've got. Most senators wouldn't even consider going up against them like this.
As [Reid] takes over the leadership role in merging different variations of health care legislation in the Senate, there have been indications that he's prepared to abandon the government-run plan.
In going after Reid on this front, the PCCC has two important data points at its disposal. A September 2009 poll commissioned by Daily Kos showed that 52 percent of Nevadans support a public option. In that same survey, only 36 percent of respondents said they had favorable view of Reid -- 52 percent said their view was unfavorable.
PCCC co-founder Stephanie Taylor elaborated on how we are using that leverage in our email to 225,000 folks today:
We know that Sen. Reid is concerned about his election next year. Polls show him trailing Republicans, and he's already running campaign ads.
Our ad will remind him that for many voters back home, the public option is a make-or-break issue. Voters want Reid to fight for the public option and win -- not cave.
This week is critical. Now's the time to put pressure on Harry Reid and let him know that his legacy will be judged by the strength he shows in this moment.
Last week, Mike Stark asked Joe Lieberman if he'd side with Republicans to block a vote on health care reform.
Lieberman's response: "I haven't decided that yet."
Yesterday, Politico had yet another Lieberman response to the same question:
“Not vote for cloture? I wouldn’t rule that possibility out — not at all,” said Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who caucuses with the Democrats.
With the health care issue now moving into Harry Reid's court, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee will deliver this petition signed by over 85,000 people to Reid today:
"Any Democratic senators who support a Republican attempt to block a vote on health care reform should be stripped of their leadership titles. Americans deserve a clean up-or-down vote on health care."
Hi, folks. Meet Nancy Randolph from Maine -- a very nice lady I've talked to a lot in the last week as we prepared a new TV ad released today.
Before her first husband died of cancer, they thought they had great health insurance...until their insurance company denied him needed care. That drove them into bankruptcy.
Now, the senator who Nancy voted for -- Republican Olympia Snowe -- opposes the public health insurance option. And Nancy has something to say about that.
Our goal is to flood Maine and DC with $100,000 worth of these ads -- to really ramp up the pressure on Snowe. In just a few hours, we're $32,000$34,000$36,000 $45,000 of the way there -- but we do need your help.
As you know, this a critical time to put pressure on Snowe.
All week, the powerful Senate Finance Committee will take important health care votes -- including on whether to include a public option. Snowe will be a key vote on the Finance Committee.
Markos' recent poll shows Maine voters favor a public option 2 to 1. Among independent voters, it's 3 to 1. Yet Snowe urged President Obama to take the public option off the table "because it's universally opposed by all Republicans in the Senate."
STATE BLOGS
