I just received an email through a small online newsletter that I subscribe to. I thought it was an extremely well-thought-out piece and wanted to share it with you. So I contacted the author, Lea Jones, who said “Post it!” Lea started off with a nod to George Lakoff and went on to create this extremely simple and flexible frame:
As a songwriter (and progressive activist and teacher and dabbler in communications and advertising), I have a fascination with this question and, I humbly submit, at least something of a way with words. So here’s what I’ve been kicking around for the past few months. Hopefully, parts of this construct will spread to where it’ll count:
Ahem. What do we as progressives and/or Democrats stand for?
We stand for RESPONSIBILITY, HONESTY AND A FAIR SHARE ECONOMY.
More below the fold.
Thin on details, yes? That’s fine. Pick an issue, then drop it into the appropriate frame. Simplicity is good for those with short attention spans and/or those with complex messages.
Honesty and Responsibility are the overarching themes.
RESPONSIBILITY (Here DEMS can state “positives” about their agenda while, conveniently, slamming the GOP!)
- Fiscal RESPONSIBILITY means a balanced federal budget. Cite the huge deficits piled up under Reagan and both Bushes vs. the massive Clinton surplus.
- RESPONSIBLE federal government will provide for the protection of its citizenry by maintaining a strong (but not disproportionate) military. Whimsical military actions (see “Iraq”) will be avoided.
- Caring for veterans (VA) is a federal RESPONSIBILITY.
- Keeping health care costs down and retirement programs stable for the elderly is the government’s RESPONSIBILITY.
- Providing our kids a Headstart is a federal RESPONSIBILITY.
- RESPONSIBLE federal government will protect the natural environment (and, hence, the people).
- RESPONSIBLE federal government will encourage innovation and forward thinking in dealing with the challenges of energy consumption and the use of natural resources.
- Adequately funding federal programs (instead of placing the burden on states) is a RESPONSIBILITY of the Congress.
- Providing equal opportunity for those citizens who have been trodden upon, exploited, or otherwise discriminated against by our society is a RESPONSIBILITY.
- RESPONSIBILITY is an indicator of MORALITY.
HONESTY (This allows for a blanket repudiation of many things GOP):
- How about the Bush administration (the face of the GOP) and their penchant for naming programs that do the opposite of what they claim: Clear Skies, Healthy Forests, etc. NOT HONEST!
- Killing 100K Iraqis in the name of “freedom” is NOT HONEST. The war, of course, was marketed on a deception. NOT HONEST. Claiming “progress” in Iraq is (generally) NOT HONEST. Claiming that “the `terrorists’ hate our freedom” is NOT HONEST. Saying we’ll leave when the Iraqis are ready to run their own country is also NOT HONEST (given those pesky military bases we’re building…).
- “States Rights v. Federal Intrusion” is a bread and butter theme for the GOP. But between the reality of (or call for) federal action re: education (NCLB), gay marriage, prayer in school, right to die, medical marijuana, etc., the GOP in fact advocates stepping all over states’ rights, when it suits their purposes. NOT HONEST.
- That GOP politicos pay lip service to making abortion illegal but don’t in fact intend to outlaw it is NOT HONEST. This is, by the way (as Molly Ivins points out) how the GOP continually suckers the religious right.
- That GOP politicos pay lip service to stanching moral and cultural decay but have no answer for same, and no stomach for dealing with the rot that is primetime television programming (Fox is as raunchy as they come) is NOT HONEST.
- That the Bush administration favors policies aimed at further enriching the rich while destroying the middle class, meanwhile extolling the virtues of the “small businessman,” is NOT HONEST.
- HONESTY is the foundation of MORALITY. Dems and/or progressives will not sugarcoat and mislead in order to gain votes (but we WILL work on a clean, persuasive message).
A FAIR SHARE ECONOMY
This is our answer to the GOP’s “tax relief” frame.
Those who have gained financially from what the United States offers (opportunity and infrastructure) should feel GREAT about giving back significant portions of what they’ve earned. This includes both corporations and individuals making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
Those who are “comfortable” but not affluent should feel GREAT about giving back a portion of what they earn in order that services (schools, law enforcement) and infrastructure (roads, power) will be maintained.
Those who work at the Wal-Marts of the world should be paid a working wage and be offered health benefits as part of their employment package. The cost of living has gone up in the past thirty years; the minimum wage hasn’t come close to keeping pace.
The phrase FAIR SHARE ECONOMY avoids the word “tax” altogether.
SUMMARY
Being Dems and/or progressive thinkers, you’ll want to add your two cents, to elaborate, to fine tune, to disagree entirely, to sing some random folk tune, etc.
Whatever.
The point is this: in order to “clean House in `06 – sending Tom DeLay back to the MINORITY party in CONGRESS (or, better yet, back to Houston) – we need to come together NOW with a message that the masses can comprehend and embrace. We need a message that all our people can deliver. The message must be simple and brief, and the points need to be embraced and then POUNDED OUT by all!
That Ben Brandzel (Move On), Donna Brazile, and Matt Bennett of Third Way couldn’t articulate a focused message during a national radio broadcast this late in the game is ASTOUNDING. Let’s get it together folks, please. Talk to your leadership about adopting this message: “RESPONSIBILITY, HONESTY AND A FAIR SHARE ECONOMY”.
Time is much shorter than you think.
Lea Jones
Progressives of Northern Maryland
The Swing States Road Show
So what do you all think? To me, it seems so simple and so obvious. Yet the powers-that-be in the Democratic party seem to think that jettisoning progressive principles is a better strategy than simply enunciating a clear and articulate message. Sigh.
