Author: winningprogressive

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

There was good news yesterday when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid promised, with strong White House support, to bring Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (“DADT”) repeal to the Senate floor for a full vote in December. As discussed here a few days ago, DADT repeal is a matter of fundamental fairness and equality that also happens to be supported by 78% of Americans.  In response to fear that the Democrats would cave and not bring DADT up for a vote, progressive bloggers and groups like the Human Rights Campaign organized efforts to get tons of calls to the White House and Congress demanding DADT repeal this year.  Today’s announcement is evidence that these efforts to create progressive pressure on our lawmakers is getting some traction.

Of course, Sen. Reid’s promise to hold a vote on DADT repeal does not mean that it is going to pass or that Republicans won’t try to filibuster any such vote.  Therefore, it is critical that we keep up the calls to our Senators on this basic issue of fairness and equality.  You can find their contact information here.    The most important targets are the following:

Harry Reid (Nevada) – (202) 224-3542 – Thank Senator Reid for vowing to bring DADT repeal to a vote in December

Carl Levin (Michigan) – (202) 224-6221 – Senator Levin is the Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee – make sure to ask that he not agree to remove DADT repeal from the Defense Reauthorization Bill

Claire McCaskill (Missouri) – 202-224-6154

Olympia Snowe (Maine) – (202) 224-5344

Susan Collins (Maine) – (202) 224-2523

Scott Brown (Massachusetts) – (202) 224-4543

George LeMieux (Florida) – (202) 224-3041

George Voinovich (Ohio) – (202) 224-3353

Jim Webb (Virginia) – (202)-224-4024

If you reach your Senators, send us an email to let us know whether they are willing to commit to supporting an up-or-down vote on DADT repeal during the lame duck session.  That way we can keep track of who is on our side and who needs to hear more from their constituents.

Cross-posted at Winning Progressive

In February, President Obama created by Executive Order the Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which is charged with designing a plan to achieve long term fiscal sustainability for our country.  While this goal is important, the steps we take to achieve it say a lot about our priorities as a country.  

Unfortunately, the draft proposal released on Wednesday by the two Co-Chairs of the Commission suggests that their priorities are way out of line with what is good for our country.   In particular, the proposal seeks to reduce the deficit on the backs of the middle and working classes and at the expense of Medicare and Social Security, while at the same time providing further tax cuts to the rich.  Such an approach should be roundly rejected as unacceptable.

Some of the most objectionable provisions in the Co-Chairs’ proposal include:

* Lower Taxes For the Rich: The Co-Chairs propose to reduce tax rates on the wealthiest Americans, who have made out like bandits for the past thirty years, from 39.6% (assuming the Bush tax cuts expire) to 23%.  Corporate tax rates would also be reduced to 23%.  Cutting already low tax rates on the highest income brackets is not a good way to reduce the budget deficit and simply increases the cuts in government programs that would be needed to achieve budget balance.  

While the Commission claims to offset those cuts with elimination of various credits and deductions, it is very hard to believe that some of the deductions (such as the mortgage deduction) will be eliminated. And even if those deductions and credits are eliminated, much of the burden of such changes (such as elimination of the Earned Income Tax Credit) would fall hardest on the working class and poor, not the rich folks who would be getting the biggest reduction in their tax rates.

* Cutting Future Social Security Benefits: The Co-Chairs propose to index Social Security benefits to a lower inflation rate and to raise the retirement age, both of which would cut benefits.  Such major changes are not needed to preserve the long term solvency of Social Security, however, especially if we extend the Social Security tax to all income, rather than just on the current bottom 85% of wages, or the 90% of wages proposed by the Co-Chairs.

* Cuts in Medicare and Medicaid: The Co-Chairs propose to cap Medicare and Medicaid expenses, and to increase co-pays for Medicaid patients.  Such cuts are highly problematic, especially in the absence of any serious effort to cut the actual costs of health care.

* Weakening Federal Agencies: The Co-Chairs proposed across the board federal employee pay freezes, combined with 10% reductions in the federal workforce.  These proposals would further weaken the effectiveness of our government and make it even more reliant on private contractors.

* Cutting Military and Veterans’ Health Benefits: The Co-Chairs propose to cut military and veterans’ health benefits by increasing co-pays and deductibles.  Such proposals are unjustified, especially after we have asked our brave troops to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for the past eight plus years.

It is important to note that the Co-Chairs’ proposal does include some worthwhile recommendations.  For example, much of the $200 billion in cuts in federal programs, including $100 billion in defense cuts, seem appropriate.  However, the core of the proposal is unacceptable, as it undermines fundamental programs like Social Security and Medicare, impacts the middle and working classes the most, and provides further tax cuts to the wealthy elite.

There are far more sensible ways to achieve long term fiscal discipline in our country, including increasing the contribution that the wealthy are required to pay, much larger cuts in unnecessary defense spending, ending farming and other corporate subsidies, and bringing health care costs under control.  Unfortunately, this plan does not do any of those things and, instead, seeks to balance the budget on the backs of middle and working class Americans.

While the Co-Chairs’ proposal is referred to as a draft, and the final plan from the Commission as a whole will not be finalized until December 1, the biggest concern is that this draft proposal could serve as a baseline for a “compromise” that will still have most of the problematic aspects of this proposal.  In addition, the Commission’s final proposal will serve as a roadmap to Republicans in Congress, who have long used disingenuous concerns about fiscal responsibility as cover for their goal of weakening and ten eliminating Social Security and Medicare.

Therefore, it is critical that we nip this draft proposal in the bud by contacting the Democratic members of the Commission and urge them to follow the lead of Speaker Pelosi and other progressives and declare this proposal unacceptable.  In addition, call the White House –  202-456-1111 – and your member of Congress and urge them to do the same thing.

Max Baucus – (202) 224-2651

(406) 657-6790           (406) 586-6104           (406) 782-8700          (406) 365-7002                       (406) 761-1574             (406) 449-5480            (406) 756-1150           (406) 329-3123

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA 31) – (202) 225-6235  (213) 483-1425

Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) – (202) 224-2043

(701) 852-0703           (701) 775-9601          (701) 258-4648           (701) 232-8030

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) – (202) 224-2152 –

(312) 353-4952           (217) 492-4062           (618) 351-1122

Alice Rivlin, Senior Fellow, Brookings Institute – (202) 797-6121

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL 9) – (202) 225-2111 – (847) 328-3409 – (773) 506-7100

Rep. John Spratt (D-SC 5) – (202) 225-5501

(803)327-1114            (803) 773-3362           (843) 393-3998

Cross-posted at Winning Progressive

We here at Winning Progressive are generally not ones to attack segments of the Democratic Party, or engage in the endless debates over whether someone is a “real” Democrat.  Such debates distract us from the real threat that we need to challenge, namely the well-organized conservative Republicans who make even the most middle-of-the-road Democrats look wonderful in comparison.  As such, if you are willing to put a “D” after your name, vote for Democratic leadership in the House and Senate, and not do anything illegal or corrupt, we are typically happy to support you in a general election.

Having said that, constructive criticism, debate, and reflection are critical to making the Democratic Party as effective as possible, especially in the wake of a major electoral defeat such as we suffered on Tuesday.  Without such criticism, debate, and reflection, whatever flaws contributed to Tuesday’s election results are likely to continue sapping Democratic support in future elections.  With that in mind, one bit of constructive criticism I have is that the Democrats keep failing short in their efforts to build a sustainable progressive majority because on a number of major issues, the Democrats follow the advice of Blue Dogs and centrists like Evan Bayh.  And when this Blue Dog/centrist advice turns out to be wrong on a number of occasions, it hinders the ability of Democrats to win more votes moving forward.    Examples of such Blue Dog/centrist hindrance are numerous, including:

1. The Iraq War: In 2003, Congress addressed the Iraq War, which progressives knew had disaster written all over it. Yet many Democratic House and Senate members voted to authorize the invasion, following the advice of centrists who claimed that such a vote was necessary to win over moderates. Of course, voters who decided who to support based on favoring the Iraq War continued to vote for the party that actively wanted that war, the Republicans, not the party whose members probably didn’t want the war but voted for it anyways out of political cowardice. And when the Iraq War proved to be the disaster that progressives predicted, many Democrats were unable to persuasively argue that they had better judgment on the issue because many of them had followed the advice of the Blue Dogs and centrists.

2. Deregulation: A similar example is  with deregulation of our financial industry. Progressives continually warned that the deregulatory policies being pushed by Republicans in the 1990s and early 2000s would lead to a disaster. Yet Blue Dogs and centrists convinced many Democrats to support the deregulation as a way to show that they were "moderates." Then after the economy tanked due to the financial meltdown, Democrats were unable to reap political benefits on the issue because too many of them had gone along with deregulation.

3. The Economy: Now we’ve seen the same pattern on the economy in general. Progressives warned that the stimulus was too small, that aggressive action needed to be taken to save people’s homes, and that we should take action to require banks receiving the TARP bailout to start investing and agreeing to limits on the shady business practices that caused the meltdown. Instead, President Obama was too timid, following the advice of centrists like Summers and Geinthner, proposing a too small stimulus, and failing to address the mortgage crisis. And the result was a loss of more than 60 seats in the House and at least 6 seats in the Senate.

4. The Counter Example – Protecting Social Security: The flip side of this story is also telling. Fresh off re-election, President Bush in 2005 proposed to privatize Social Security. Blue Dogs and centrists immediately recommended that the Democrats be "moderate" and propose to meet the Republicans at some undisclosed middle ground. Fortunately, the Democrats in Congress ignored that advice and instead fought the Republican plan to privatize Social Security as the economically ridiculous plan that it is. As a result, President Bush’s proposal was defeated and the electoral tide began shifting toward the Democrats, culminating in the pick up of 33 seats in the House in 2006.

I have no problem with Blue Dogs and centrists voting against their party’s position on occasions when that is necessary in the district they represent.  However, it is a far cry from such voting to the active efforts by the Blue Dogs to undermine the progressive wing of the Democratic Party by constantly questioning our political viability and feeding into Republican talking points about taxes, the deficit, etc.   In addition, regardless of the Blue Dogs’ goals or motivations, it is important to keep in mind that their policy prescriptions have led Democrats to miss prime opportunities to do what is best of the country policy wise and what is politically best for the party.

In the wake of Tuesday’s elections, there is a growing debate within the Democratic Party and in the media to decide how the President and Democratic Congress members should react to the electoral results.  Now is the time for you to help steer that debate in the progressive direction by identifying what progressives would do on the economy and by pointing out the number of times in the past that the Blue Dog/centrist point of view has led to missed opportunities and blown elections for the Democrats.

In order to impact this ongoing debate about the future of the Democratic Party, we need to take our message outside the progressive bubble.  Put your Congressional representatives’ offices on speed dial, so that they hear from you on this issue.  Contact the Democratic Party and the White House to let them know that you support aggressive governmental action on stimulus, banks, and mortgages rather than the Party going down the Blue Dog path.  And write to your local newspaper about how boldness, not timidity, is the path forward for the Democrats.

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

There is no sugar coating it – the Democrats took a serious beating in the elections earlier this week.  Democrats lost the House, with Republicans picking up at least 60 seats (10 remain undecided as of this writing).  Democrats also lost at least 6 seats in the Senate and 9 Governorships.  A few true progressive leaders, such as Russ Feingold in Wisconsin, lost their seats in Congress, and Joe Sestak and Alexi Giannoulias both narrowly lost their Senate bids in Pennsylvania and Illinois, respectively.  In short, the American public sent a strong message to the Democrats by either voting Republican or, in the case of many Democratic voters, staying home.

So where do we go from here?  We will have more thoughts as things proceed, but here are our initial thoughts:

1. Don’t Despair – Yes, the election was a major rebuke to the Democrats.  But it was not an endorsement of Republicans or their policies, both of which remain highly unpopular.  Instead, the outcome was the result of justifiable voter anger about the economy and a shift from 2008 in who showed up to vote towards a significant increase in the proportion of voters were over age 65, and a decline in the proportion of younger and African American voters.

We also should keep in mind some bright spots.  Democrats, of course, still have the White House.  In addition, Democrats retained control of the Senate with 52 or 53 seats (Washington State is still undecided), which is more seats than they had between 1995 and 2008.  And after picking up 31 House seats in 2006 and 23 more in 2008, it is not surprising that the Democrats would lose a hefty number in 2010.  Fortunately, only four of the House losses were members of the House Progressive Caucus, while 29 Blue Dogs who ran away from the Democratic message are now out of the House.  Some of the worst of Republican nominees – such as Christine O’Donnell, Sharron Angle, Ken Buck, Joe Miller, Tom Tancredo, and Carl Paladino – lost.   And the Democrat’s Western firewall held up, thanks in part to continued overwhelming support from Latino voters, who helped put Harry Reid over the top, return the California Governor’s seat to the Democrats, and re-elect Barbara Boxer.

2. Be Bolder – The clear lesson from this election is that the Democrats need to be bolder, especially when it comes to addressing the serious economic issues facing middle and working class Americans.  As the data about significant voter anger and apathy among Democrats about the economy demonstrates, yesterday’s drubbing was largely due to the failure of the Democrats to fix unemployment, low economic growth, and the mortgage crisis.

In 2008 sent the Democrats to Washington to fix our economy.  Unfortunately, President Obama and the Democratic leadership gave into the Blue Dogs and centrists who said we had to be cautious and centrist in response to the economic crisis. Therefore, we passed a stimulus that was too small, made ourselves appear to be in bed with the bankers by appointing Summers and Geithner, and failed to help people whose mortgages were underwater.   The result was an effort that laudably stabilized the economy, but was far too weak to return people to work and save their houses.  Without these continuing economic problems, the election would not have been a drubbing and the tea party/Fox News attacks on President Obama’s other significant achievements (health care reform, student loan reform, credit card industry reform, Wall Street regulation, etc.) would have largely fallen on deaf ears.  And without these continued economic problems for average Americans, the voters would not have felt a need to send a message to the Democrats.

This is hardly the first time that the Blue Dog/centrist view point has led Democrats to take positions that are harmful both policy-wise and politically.  For example, during the 1990s and early 2000s, too many Democrats, at the urging of the centrists, went along with the conservative deregulatory policies that helped trigger the financial and housing market collapses.  Similarly, Democrats who should have known better voted to authorize invading Iraq because Blue Dogs pushed such vote as the only politically viable approach.  Both of those positions have been proven wrong, as progressives predicted, but Democrats were hamstrung from effectively making the case on those issues when their wrongness became clear because the Blue Dogs thinking had led many Democrats to go along with those policies. On the flip side, when Democrats did not buy the Blue Dog line in 2005 when President Bush proposed Social Security privatization, we won and it helped turn the tide against the Republicans leading to the 2006 and 2008 victories.

The silver lining is that many of the Blue Dogs who would constantly undermine any effort to be bold are gone, and the centrists can be blamed for yesterday’s debacle. This frees President Obama and Democratic House and Senate members to propose a truly bold plan with aggressive action to help people keep their houses even if it means banks taking a hit on the mortgages, major new aid to state and local government, substantial investments in rebuilding our infrastructure, a major shift in the tax burden away from the middle and working classes and toward the wealthy elite, and a New Deal-style jobs program that will get people back to work.  Sure, such a plan would be shot down by the House GOP, but Republican ideas are not going to help the middle and working classes in America or achieve economic improvements. By proposing bold steps, President Obama and the Democrats will have something to run on in 2012 and can enact real reform soon thereafter.

3. Stay Involved – Progressives are in a serious political fight against a well-funded and well-organized conservative opposition that is willing to do whatever it takes to win.  While we should all take a week or two off to recharge our batteries, we must all stay active in order to win this fight.  And we must also change some of our tactics moving forward.

Most importantly, we need to take our message outside the progressive bubble.  Put your Congressional representatives’ offices on speed dial, so that they hear from you whenever there is a major issue in play.  Contact the Democratic Party and the White House to let them know you want bold action, not more “centrism”.  Send letters to your local newspaper.  Organize your family, friends, and neighbors to do the same things.

In short, fight back against the conservatives and their “centrist” enablers by getting our message out that this election was about the Democrat’s timidity on the economy and that the way back to power is to be bold.

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

It all comes down to Tuesday, when we, the voters, get to decide whether our country will keep moving forward with the Democrats to continue to address the economic and other major issues facing our nation, or whether we will spend the next two years mired in the obstructionism, petty investigations, and government shutdowns that Republicans have promised if they take power.

Here’s what you can do to keep America moving forward:

1. VOTE on Tuesday, November 2

a.       Find your polling place here.

b.      If you believe you are an eligible voter, but election judges believe you are not, you have the right under the Help America Vote Act to cast a provisional ballot, which means your vote is recorded and your eligibility will be determined later.

c.       While state laws vary, it is safest to bring at least one piece of identification, such as a driver’s license, passport, utility bill, or bank statement with your name and current address on it.

d.      If you encounter harassment, broken machines, or other problems at the polling place, contact the Voter Protection Hotline at 1-800-311-8683.

e.       If you haven’t decided whether to vote, or who to vote for, check out my closing argument in favor of voting Democratic.

2. Urge Your Family and Friends to Vote

a.       Visit, call, e-mail, or Facebook your friends and relatives to urge them to vote.  Here is sample text that you can personalize and can cut and paste into an e-mail or Facebook posting:

Please join me in voting Democratic on November 2.  You can find your polling place here and remember to bring a piece of identification with your name and current address (such as a driver’s license or utility bill) with you to the polling place.

I am voting Democratic because over the past 20 months, President Obama and the Democrats have stabilized our economy from the Bush Recession, produced private sector job growth every month this year, reduced the deficit, ended pre-existing condition health insurance exclusions, reined in Wall Street, and increased student loan funding by $65 billion.  Republican leaders, meanwhile, have promised to engage in continued obstructionism, launch investigations similar to what they did to President Clinton, shutdown the government if they don’t get their way, and repeal the Democrats’ common sense reforms of Wall Street and the health insurance industry.  Let’s keep moving America forward by voting Democratic on Tuesday.

3. Help Turn Out The Vote

a.       If at all possible, take all or some of Election Day off from work so that you can help turn out the vote.

b.      Sign up to do door-to-door canvassing, which is the most effective way to increase voter turnout.

c.       Call voters from the comfort of your own home to remind them to vote Democratic.

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

Tuesday’s elections are going to be won or lost at the margins.  The polls show that virtually all of the key races out there are within or near the margin of error.  While Republicans are holding slim leads among “likely” voters, Democrats tend to hold the lead when all registered voters are counted.  In addition, it appears that many of the polls are underestimating Democratic strength by not polling people who only use cell phones.  Cell phone only voters tend to be young people, which is a demographic that leans strongly toward the Democrats, but which are also less likely to vote.

The bottom line is that getting out our vote is absolutely critical to making sure that we wake up on November 3 to continued Democratic majorities in Congress.  And getting out the vote is something that all of us can help do.  Numerous studies show that door-to-door canvassing can increase turnout by as much as 10-15% among voters who are contacted, and by 5% among other voters in those households.  And phonebanking can be nearly as effective as canvassing in mobilizing people to vote.

Fortunately, the Democrats have put together perhaps the largest GOTV effort for a mid-term election in history.  But this effort will only work if all of us get involved in it over these final 72 hours.  So:

1. If at all possible, take all or some of Election Day off from work so that you can help turn out the vote.

2. Sign up to do door-to-door canvassing.

3. Call voters to help remind them to vote Democratic.

4. Forward this post to your family and friends and urge them to help out.

5. Get offline once you have done the above. Turn off your TV. Even close your books, newspapers and magazines, and help Get Out The Vote!

As Scott Urb over at the Great Lakes, Great Times, Great Scott blog recently pointed out, numerous elections throughout history have been decided by extremely small margins.  For example, Al Franken won the Senate seat in Minnesota by 312 votes, and President Bush was declared the winner of Florida by 537 votes in 2000.

With this year’s elections so close, let’s make sure we all do everything we can to ensure that we wake up on November 3 with the Democratic majorities intact, rather kicking ourselves for not doing more.

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

With election day rapidly approaching, now is the perfect time to summarize exactly what is at stake on November 2.

When President Obama and the Democratic Congress took office in January 2009 after eight years of President Bush, our economy was in a free fall.  1.8 million jobs had been lost in the three months prior to President Obama’s inauguration, and a total of 3.5 million jobs had been lost in 2008.  Our financial system had melted down, and President Bush had provided Wall Street with a $700 billion bailout with virtually no oversight.  Median household income and net worth had declined, while the poverty rate and the number of uninsured had increased significantly.

President Obama and the Democratic Congress immediately began working to address these critical issues.  Democrats passed a stimulus bill that stabilized our economy and stemmed the astronomical job losses that occurred under the closing year of the Bush Administration.  As a result, in 2010, private sector jobs have increased every month.   Democrats enacted a Wall Street reform bill to regulate derivatives and avoid future bank bailouts, and reformed Bush’s Wall Street bailout in ways that have ensured that the banks have paid almost the entire amount back to the taxpayers.  Democrats tackled health insurance issues, by enacting reforms that will end abusive industry practices like pre-existing conditions denials, expand health insurance coverage to 32 million more Americans, close the Medicare donut hole, and begin to curb the rising cost of health care.  The Democrats also reformed student loans by shifting $65 billion away from subsidies for banks and toward increasing Pell Grants and other student aid, extended unemployment benefits and COBRA health insurance coverage to soften the blow of the Bush Recession, provided aid to small businesses, passed significant credit card industry reforms, created a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to help ensure that Americans are no longer ripped off by the shady practices of payday lenders, credit card companies, and other financial institutions, and had a banner year on legislation to benefit veterans.   And Democrats did all of this in the face of virtually universal obstructionism from Republicans in Congress.

Much more, of course, remains to be done.  Creating jobs and lowering the unemployment rate is critical.  We need to pass comprehensive immigration reform that creates a path to earned citizenship.  We need to repeal DADT.  We need to address climate change and seize the economic opportunity provided by developing a clean energy economy.  We need to continue rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure.  We need to find sensible ways to address long term deficits, reduce the influence of corporate interests on our political system, and narrow the growing economic inequality in our system.

The question for November 2 is who do you trust more to address these major policy issues facing our nation?  On one side, we have Democrats who have worked hard to address the major issues of the day.  You might not always fully agree with the results or find them to be ideal, but at least with the Democrats we have been debating and focusing on how to make progress on issues that directly impact the lives of virtually every American.

On the other side are Republicans who have made clear that they care more about obstructionism, investigations, and repealing what progress has been made than about addressing policy issues in any serious manner.  For the past two years, Republicans have been the party of no, using the filibuster and other obstructive practices at an historically unprecedented rate.  Both wannabe House Speaker John Boehner and Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, have promised to continue this obstructionism by announcing that they will not compromise with Democrats over the next two years.   Meanwhile, wannabe Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has stated that the Republicans’ number one priority is to make sure that President Obama is a one-term President, rather than, say, helping the economy or creating jobs.  Meanwhile, if they were to gain a majority in the House, Republicans are promising a re-run of the investigations that they launched against President Clinton, when, for example, they took 140 hours of Congressional testimony on the Clintons’ use of the White House Christmas card list.

On policy, Republicans have offered little outside of tax cuts for the wealthy elite and threatening to repeal Wall Street reform and to shut down the government if they are unable to directly repeal health insurance reform.  Republicans make loud claims about wanting to cut the budget deficit, which was higher under the last year of President Bush than it is this year, but they refuse to offer any details about how they would do it.  The “Pledge” that the Republicans issued as their main policy document was widely dismissed as lacking details on numerous important issues, such as how to fix the economy or address Social Security and Medicare.  Some of their leading candidates, such as Sharron Angle in Nevada or Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, either claim that it would not be their job as a Senator to try to increase jobs, or are unwilling to offer even basic details about their policy positions until after the election.  And when the Republican candidates do talk policy, it is usually to try to disavow past statements that they want to privatize Social Security, Medicare, and the Veterans’ Administration, eliminate the minimum wage, and prohibit choice even in the cases of rape and incest.

So, the choice is clear.   At a time when our nation is faced with serious issues, Republicans are promising obstructionism, investigations, and little in the way of solutions.  By contrast, the Democrats, despite some disappointments, have a record of stopping our economic free fall and of enacting significant reforms in areas that directly benefit the lives of virtually every American, and will at least provide the opportunity for us to continue to work to improve our economy and to address the other major issues facing our nation.

If you want to help keep Congress Democratic, now is the time to act by:

1. Forwarding this blog post to any undecided voters or Democrats who are thinking about not voting that you know.

2. Canvassing for the Democratic Party. We’re doing it. Follow this link to find out how you can do it too.

3. Phonebanking for the Democratic Party. You can sometimes even do it from home. Click here to find out where and how to phonebank. An hour here or there can make a big difference.

4. Signing up to protect the vote from Republican voter suppression efforts on Election Day.

5. Getting offline once you have done the above. Turn off your TV. Even close your books, newspapers and magazines, and help Get Out The Vote!

Cross-posted at WinningProgressive

We here at Winning Progressive are not the type to have political heroes.  While there are many political candidates that we proudly support because they share the views we believe in or because they are significantly better than the alternative, we realize that all politicians are humans and, therefore, flawed.  In addition, politicians work in a system that is flooded with well-funded interests, that requires compromise to get things done, and that we can often only get progress out if we politically force our elected officials to aggressively support our interests.  In short, even our favorite political leaders are bound to let us down on occasion, just as we are sometimes let down by our friends or relatives.  As such, even as we strongly support various candidates, we recognize that raising a politician to hero status places unrealistic expectations on that person.

Having said that, there are some political leaders who we hold in especially high esteem.  On such leader is Paul Wellstone, the former Democratic U.S. Senator from Minnesota, who tragically died eight years ago today.  Senator Wellstone was first elected in 1990, and quickly became a leading progressive in the Senate for his willingness to strongly and eloquently stand up for progressive causes even when they were not politically popular.  Senator Wellstone was re-elected in 1996, and died eleven days before election day in 2002 when he was running for a third term.

Senator Wellstone holds a place close to our hearts because of his willingness to proudly stand up for the under-represented and to stay true to his progressive values even at the risk of losing votes, and for the time and dedication he put into building a true grassroots campaign model that continues to this day with trainings run by Wellstone Action, which works to develop future progressive leaders.  At a time when the Senate and House are increasingly dominated by massive amounts of corporate cash and politicians who rely mainly on television advertising for their campaigns, the values and tactics of Senator Wellstone are sorely missed to this day.

We’d like to close with the below video of Senator Wellstone announcing his opposition to the Iraq War in October 2002.  Only a couple weeks before his death, Senator Wellstone gave this speech in the midst of a tough re-election campaign and at a time when the proposal to invade Iraq had strong public support.  Senator Wellstone could have easily gone with the political winds (as many Democrats who should have known better did) and voted for the Iraq War.  Instead, he stood up for his beliefs and cast his vote against the war.

As we work after election day to push our representatives to support our progressive values, we could do a lot worse than urging them to follow the example set by Senator Wellstone.

Cross-posted at Winning Progressive

One way to discover what a candidate’s priorities would be if they were to take office is to see who is supporting their election.  This year, it is hard to know exactly who is funding the Republicans, because they are being supported by numerous outside organizations that are spending tens of millions of dollars but that do not have to report where they are getting that money from.  What is clear is that eight misleadingly-named corporate front groups are planning to spend more than $250 million this election cycle, with almost all of it devoted to defeating Democrats and electing Republicans.  

As reported by the Washington Post, Fact Check.Org, and the People For the American Way, the outside organizations who are trying to buy the election for the Republicans include:

   
• Chamber of Commerce – $20.5 million spent so far – planning to spend $75 million or more total – 501(c)(6) organization – does not have to disclosure its donors

   
• Americans for Prosperity – planning to spend $45 million – run by the billionaire Koch brothers – donors are not disclosed – organization has led the fight against tobacco regulation, and also bankrolled the start of the tea party and opposition to health care reform

   
• American Crossroads – $13.5 million spent so far – expect to spend $55 million total, plus $10 million on get out the vote efforts – run by Karl Rove and GOP consultant – funding is funneled through a spinoff organization – the Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies – which does not have to disclose its donors

   
• Americans for Job Security – $8 million so far – 501(c)(6) trade association, founded by insurance and logging interests – no donor disclosure, but is known to have received funding from the pharmaceutical industry and other industries over the years

   
• American Future Fund – $7.7 million spent so far – expects to spend $25 million total – Iowa-based organization that appears to have ties to the ethanol industry – does not disclose its donors

   
• 60 Plus Association – expects to spend $6.9 million – appears to be a pharmaceutical industry front group, and has fought to privatize Social Security and to eliminate the estate tax – does not have to disclose donors

   
• Club for Growth – $4.5 million spent so far – aiming for $24 million total – does not disclose donors

   
• American Action Network – plans to spend $25 million – does not disclose its donors  

This huge influx of money to fight against Democrats is great evidence that large corporations know that it is Republicans who will do their bidding in Washington, while it is Democrats who have fought to curb those corporate interests in order to protect every day Americans.

For example, Democrats are:

   
• Reforming Wall Street by regulating derivatives, working to prevent future bailouts, and creating a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

   
• Reforming Student Loans by shifting $65 billion away from subsidizing banks and toward increasing student loans

   
• Reining in Shady Recruiting and Tuition Practices at for-profit colleges and universities

   
• Stopping Abusive Health Insurance Industry Practices by ending pre-existing condition exclusions, retroactive policy cancellations, and requiring that at least 80-85% of your premiums are spent on health care

   
• Reining in the Credit Card Industry by prohibiting retroactive interest rate increases and limiting fees and penalties

   
• Phasing out the Medicare Donut Hole and ended unnecessary insurance industry subsidies in the Medicare program

In short, corporate interests are spending $250 million to fight Democrats because they know that Democrats are working to break the stranglehold that those interests have on our political system.  If you want to make sure that secretive corporate donors are not able to buy the election for the Republicans, sign up to volunteer for your local Democratic candidate, write a letter to your local newspaper editor, and talk to your family, friends, and neighbors to remind them that the Democrats are on our side, while Republicans are on the side of secretive corporate interests.

Cross-posted at Winning Progressive

The Service Employee International Union (“SEIU”), which discloses the sources of its political funds, has a great new ad running in Nevada about the threat that the tea party Republican candidate for Senate poses to women specifically, and the electorate in general.  As the ad explains, the Republican candidate opposes choice even in cases of rape or incest, opposes student loans, has said she does not believe it would be her job to work to bring jobs to Nevada, and wants to privatize Social Security.

This ad is effective in two ways.  First, it shows how government can and does help people at every stage of their life.  Second, it shows what is at stake in this election – the two parties have significantly different views on critical issues, such as choice, Social Security, making college more affordable, and creating jobs, which is why it is so important that the Democrats retain their majorities on November 2.  

This SEIU ad should be modified for a number of other key races across the country.  For example,

• In Colorado, the Republican candidate has supported Social Security privatization (though he is trying to hide that belief now), is opposed to choice even in cases of rape and incest, wants to private the Veterans’ Administration health system, and believes that being gay is a choice similar to “alcoholism.”  
• In Wisconsin, the Republican candidate has no plan to create jobs, invited the author of the racist book the Bell Curve to be they keynote speaker at an education event last year, and believes that it is “crazy” and “lunacy” to think that human activity is causing climate change.  
• In Alaska, the Republican Senate candidate believes that Social Security, Medicare, and unemployment benefits are all unconstitutional, wants to abolish the minimum wage, and wants to end direct election of U.S. Senators.
• In West Virginia, the Republican Senate candidate believes that the minimum wage is unconstitutional and wants to privatize Social Security.
• In Kentucky, the Republican Senate candidate does not believe that the 1964 Civil Rights Act should have extended to private businesses, is anti-choice even in cases of rape and incest,  and refuses to say whether he supports the minimum wage.

There are critical issues at stake in this election, and Republican candidates are proposing a radical agenda on these issues.   So, make sure you go vote early, canvass and phonebank for your Democratic candidates, write a letter to your local newspaper, and talk to your family, friends, and neighbors about why we need to keep the sensible Democratic majorities and fight back against the Republicans’ radical agenda.