Secretary of State Project 
Saturday, September 16, 2006, 03:30 PM - Politics
Michael and Becky from Working Assets along with James Rucker (MoveOn '04 and Color of Change) have set up a new fundraising/ information project for Secretary of State candidates across the country - Secretary of State Project. It's designed to funnel contributions to people who will work to make sure state elections are accurate and unbiased - who will support voting rights and resist technologies and legislative strategies that limit the precious franchise. (I'm not holding my breath for HAVA or anything else federal to make things right without responsible leadership at the state level.) Send in some cash, and you too can get a sweet little thank you note from Michael Mauro in Iowa. I've set up an Act Blue Fundraising Page here, so all you shadowy readers can have a chance to step up. Thank you!!

Activism, Inc. 
Friday, September 8, 2006, 11:50 PM - Politics
So, am I part of the canvass-driven octopus that is 'strangling' the lifeblood of progressive politics, or do I work for organizations that are the best hope for reinvigorating the Democratic party and creating a national network of engaged progressives? GCI (and more pointedly the Fund for Public Interest Research - whence all of the senior GCI staff other than myself have sprung) are called out in a new book - Activism, Inc. - it argues that paid canvass operations undermine true civic participation, chew relentlessly through young idealists, and result in a dearth of employment opportunities for young progressives. The book (which I read a couple of nights ago - read a review from the Chronicle of Higher Education here) ) has accurate descriptions of how canvass offices run, including the high turnover, 'sink or swim' attitude, and demanding hours of the positions, and raises some concerning points about labor practices and compensation structure. I've certainly seen some negative consequences (both organizationally and on the individual level) of the management principles that have built these organizations, but the policies and legislation enacted and the amount of money funnelled into progressive causes through the canvass programs is phenomenal (and not acknowledged in the book). GCI's work in 2004 for the DNC added hundreds of thousands of new small donors to the party base, allowing Howard Dean to implement his 50-state strategy- which would have been impossible in a DNC built around large donors' priorities. The lack of the '04 canvass' coordination with local and state party efforts (in my opinion, since I didn't work on that project at all) was as much a reflection of the internal disorganization of the party as it was the single-minded fundraising focus of the canvasses. The regimented, rote nature of PIRG-driven canvasses is not for everyone, and definitely does not gibe with many leftists' ideals of bottom-up shared decision-making - but the goal-oriented, outcome-driven, rigorous implementation of a model is something other parts of the progressive movement would do well to emulate (even if they'd prefer to implement something entirely different than a canvass).
Our work with MoveOn in '04 (which the author loves and apparently doesn't realize was also done by GCI) was the kind of citizen participation, volunteer-based electoral work she argues for - she doesn't get that a program on that scale and timeline would be challenging to run without a seasoned organizer staff to recruit, train, and manage volunteers. Our current "Call for Change" program is a more infrastructure-driven evolution of our 2004 project - involving a broader set of MoveOn members and developing a core of progressive leadership in communities across the country.
Many of the points made about the movement's failings are a stretch to pin on canvass operations - the alienation of the progressive base can be attributed as much to over-reliance on judicial strategies (in feminist and environmental movements), the move toward checkbook-based 'membership' organizations, and the fractures between single-issue organizations, labor, and other supposed allies. Canvasses that emphasized civic engagement over fundraising would be amazing tools for citizen outreach, but it seems highly unlikley that they'd be self-sustaining financially... and while reaching like-minded progressives through electronic communications is efficient, we're a ways off from technology that allows for the kind of intensity and engagement that in-person contact affords.
I canvassed for ConnPIRG one summer in college, and while I thought that the people running the office then (and some of the canvass directors I know now) were too blindly invested in canvassing as a model, I also know we did a significant amount of public education on critical environmental issues. I fully agree that Democratic field operations are pathetic and badly organized, and still am fuming about the lack of infrastructure that remained in the wake of all the money spend on paid GOTV workers by ACT. I think MoveOn and GCI together are learning and perfecting ways to motivate and develop leadership among a group of committed electoral volunteers - necessary conditions for an effective civic engagement strategy.
The researcher in me sees many holes in the logical structure of the book - she did a reasonable job at an ethnography of the canvass, and recontacted a decent percentage of her 115 interview subjects - but the conclusions she draws about the long-term impact of canvassing on individuals and on the progressive movement are just not well-substantiated. Without a larger survey or a longer follow-up timeframe, it seems impossible to conclude much about the impact on canvassers. Her strongest points are those drawn directly from participant-observation and from readily available facts. While she raises valid criticisms of the progressive movement, it's not the kind of deep evaluation we need to create positive and sustainable change and grow our institutions, nor are they correctly attributable to the canvass activities of the Fund or GCI.

Bridgeport Ho! (what do you think - is that a better name for my blog than Fierce Piece?) 
Thursday, August 10, 2006, 01:20 PM - Sex, Politics
This Connecticut girl wanted to post about the Lamont victory last night, but I was too exhausted - now I'm glad I waited until this morning, since the outlook is much rosier since the establishment Dems are lining up behind his campaign. I'm profoundly relieved that they're forced to acknowledge the power of an antiwar candidate/ message. (Now we need Bill to get Joe to drop out - most importantly so that he doesn't screw up the Dem challengers' chances in the 3 CT house races that are up for grabs.) I hope candidates learn what they should from the Lamont victory - that a strong progressive stance on a key issue will be essential to winning this fall. (interesting article from the Greenberg camp on how issue motivation and candidate selection should play into messaging decisions). The Dems need to acknowledge that the anti-war left is the best source for energized volunteers and leadership now - they're our answer to the religiously-motivated right. 78% of CT dem primary voters were anti-war (Times exit poll) - what pushed primary turnout to unprecedented levels, and what we need to tap into this fall. Lamont's task will be to make sure that enough of the CT electorate sees Iraq as the primary issue to put himself over the top (and it's our job with Project Red-Handed to make sure that incumbent Republicans are seen as bought and paid for by corporate interests). MoveOn members made about 80K calls into CT for the primary, helping put Lamont ahead.
(and yes, the post title IS what the snobby boys from Greenwich used to call me in high school - but that didn't stop me from contributing to Lamont's campaign - it shouldn't stop you either.)
(Gossipy update: Leslie tells me Becca Lieberman got married today - very small ceremony (Sunday 8/13). Can you imagine the things that got said on THAT receiving line?)

Minimum Wage 
Sunday, July 30, 2006, 08:33 PM - Politics
Here's the kind of non-selfindulgent post I write for MomsRising...so sneaky of those damned Republicans to tie minimum wage increase to the estate tax repeal - they've been salivating to get that passed since '94, I'd imagine, and I'm hoping that they realize that this fall is their LAST CHANCE to get it though - their majority status is definitely not assured for the next Congress. Did I mention you should be making some phone calls??? MR post:

Just before leaving for their summer recess, the House passed a bill that would raise the federal hourly minimum wage from $5.25 to $7.25 over three years - but the other provisions in the bill make it very unlikely that it will pass the Senate. House Republicans were leery that Democrats would make the languishing minimum wage (untouched since 1997) a campaign issue this fall; they scrambled and passed the bill after 1AM Saturday morning. It couples the minimum wage increase with a cut in the estate tax, a tactic that might doom the bill in the Senate - it's estimated that the estate tax cut would leave a $258 billion hole in the federal budget, with wealthy families keeping most of that money. 34 Democrats joined the Republican House majority to pass the bill.

Now isn't that better than some long ramble about who reads my blog? At least you learned something from this post...



Nazi SEAL 
Thursday, July 27, 2006, 06:05 PM - Politics
Last summer I worked on a campaign to prevent military recruiters from gaining access to high school students' personal information without their consent - prompted in part by the excessive tactics of recruiters desperate to fill quotas (hot babes in Humvees on campus, etc.). Today Color of Change (black online activist group founded by Van Jones and some ex-MoveOn people) sent out a terrifying update on how military recruiters are relaxing standards and letting in more white supremacists. From a Southern Poverty Law Center report on neonazis in the U.S. military:

"The best way to reduce the number of extremists in the armed forces is to prevent them from entering the military in the first place. "But now we're lowering our recruiting standards. We're accepting lesser quality soldiers," Barfield said. In a move to boost enlistment, the military is allowing more and more recruits with criminal records to sign up. A recent Chicago Sun-Times article revealed the percentage of recruits granted "moral waivers" for past misdemeanors had more than doubled since 2001. The military also revised its rules on inductee tattoos earlier this year to allow all tattoos except those on the front of the face. Both changes in the rules made it easier for extremists to join. And while military regulations prohibit all gang-related or white supremacist tattoos, many recruiters are ignoring such tattoos, or even literally covering them up. "I had one case where a recruiter and his wife took a guy to their house and covered up his tattoos with make-up so he could pass his [physical examination]," Barfield said."

It makes me feel much better to know the war in Iraq is a source of weapons and tactical training for our homegrown terrorists, not just for the other side. Send a letter demanding action on this issue through Color of Change here.

SF Healthcare Ordinance 
Monday, July 24, 2006, 06:22 PM - Politics
Last week San Francisco passed an ordinance that is a bold step towards providing health care for all city residents. The plan is innovative, since it's not technically insurance - people covered through the plan must receive care in San Francisco through the city's system of public and community clinics and hospitals. It pulls together federal, state, and local funds, along with a mandatory contribution from employers who don't cover their employees and means-tested copayments from participants to provide basic medical care for all residents. By working with the existing system and emphasizing preventive care, it's hoped that costs can be contained and the current wasteful emergency-room centered medicine for uninsured patients can be restructured. Having seen the inefficiencies of the SF healthcare system from the inside at SF general and while doing health planning work, anything that will push things towards integration and coordination will be a positive step. Anything that takes a creative approach to the siloed funding of public services and genuinely blends funding streams is a step towards creating seamless services for people who need them- but I shudder to think about how the creaky and archaic health information systems in SF will adapt to this new world (Maybe it's a whole new landscape of streamlined efficiency since I left? Somehow I doubt it.) While the plan faced some opposition from the local business community (I got an earful from Annie, co-owner of Delfina when I was up there a week ago about it) and many of the specifics are still being worked out, it's an exciting local solution to one of our most pressing national problems...and if it means that Delfina decamps to Los Angeles, I can't say that I'd be upset about that unintended consequence. (stolen from my own shorter post on the subject at Momsrising.org).

Lebanon Relief 
Monday, July 24, 2006, 11:35 AM - Politics
It's pretty disturbing how little what's happening in Lebanon came up in conversations over the weekend...the potential for regional escalation is terrifying, and let's just say I don't have a lot of faith in Condi's ability to stop that from happening. (It's also a reminder that changing the balance of power in the House will not solve all our problems, by a long shot - the house vote for a measure supporting Israel was almost unanimous.) Hasn't anyone learned anything about the futility and risk of attacking a non-state actor in the region with conventional military forces? I don't think Israel will repeat its Lebanese occupation nightmare and invade, but the ease with which this could turn into a multi-country free-for-all is sobering. Without strong pressure for a ceasefire the temptation for Israel to take out Tehran's nuclear program must be growing almost irresistable - why not bomb Damascus while they're at it? ((Are we ready for gas to be $10/ gallon?)) Our hawky neocon faction must be drooling at the thought that Syria might be next on the list. (And yes, there should have been stronger pressure for Hezbollah to disarm, particularly after the international attention that followed Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon post-Cedar Revolution- another opportunity to more fully move a military actor into the political sphere missed.)
Donate to Lebanon relief operations here.

Republican Just Desserts 
Friday, July 21, 2006, 11:31 AM - Politics, Food

No, this is not a post about what the appropriate karmic punishment for the Republican would be...we're all about the future around here (although I probably wouldn't stop you if you wanted to hang around the corner of Francisco and Divisadero with a cream pie). On July 31st there will be parties to kick off MoveOn's fall Congressional campaign - there are already more than 400 'Just Desserts' parties scheduled across the country, but you can sign up to host your own party here - we hope to have at least 1,000 events where people will find out more about how you can be part of the master plan we've been cooking up to win back Congress in November. Can't host a party? Find one in your neighborhood here. All the work I'm putting into building a great GOTV program will be for naught without enough people involved and making phone calls over the next few months. Besides, how many other opportunities to change the political direction of our country involve pie and ice cream?

Katrina Dinner 2006 
Wednesday, July 19, 2006, 07:23 PM - Travels, Politics, Friends, Food
My friend Justin in New Orleans has devised a kind of next-year-in-the-Lower-9th ritual for the lost and wandering tribes of the city. Part voodoo, part seder, mostly party (of course) it has 5 questions, candles, bitter pickles, and red beans and rice. Send it on to the displaced and repatriated you may have sheltered last fall.



Mexican Elections 
Saturday, July 1, 2006, 04:16 PM - Politics
Update: Ugh. The last omen I want right now is a really really close election where my side loses...
I am holding my breath for the vote in Mexico tomorrow. How much will the rabid anti-immigrant rhetoric from up north factor in a Lopez Obrador victory, if he can pull it off? Seems like he's perfectly placed to capitalize on the always-simmering nationalist tendencies in Mexican culture and the sputtering inadequacy of the Fox/Bush alliance - especially given how badly the neoliberal project has failed the majority of Mexicans. And can anyone give me a good reason why WE don't vote on a weekend?


Back Next