I just returned to Seattle from Netroots Nation, the yearly gathering of progressive bloggers, journalists, and activists. Last year, in Austin, the atmosphere was absolutely electric, with the election approaching and a clear sense of battle lines drawn, victory within reach. Also, lots of great parties.
This year, at least from my limited perspective, the atmosphere was more muted, the panels less exciting, and the parties both fewer and less fun. Some of this could just be me getting to be an old fart, but others I spoke to had similar experiences.
The tone of the conference was, in part, related to a general frustration among progressives.
I wouldn't say the "netroots" (I hate that damn word) have turned on Obama, this sensationalistic HuffPo story notwithstanding. New pieces from Robert Kuttner and Jane Smiley represent a growing frustration with Obama's pursuit of bipartisanship, but overall, Obama's personal popularity is still plenty in evidence. The sense, rather, is that we are witnessing a tsunami of progressive enthusiasm, organizing, and, um, Hope crash on the shoals of the status quo ... and the status quo isn't budging. Bit by bit, the giddy high of those days following Obama's election is dissipating. It's dispiriting.
The dynamic is most obvious around health care, and in my panel Thursday morning, one of the things I discussed was what that battle portends for the battle over climate legislation when it resumes in the Senate this Fall.
Depending on who you believe, heath care is going to come to a vote anywhere between the end of September and Thanksgiving. I'd say there's around a 30-40% chance that enough conservative Democratic Senators defect that the whole project crashes and burns in a cloture vote (60 votes are needed to overcome the threat of a Republican filibuster). There's around a 60-70% chance that the Senate produces a watered-down, incrementalist bill that doesn't come anywhere close to the fundamental changes needed in U.S. health care insurance and delivery. (It looks like the public option is the latest thing to be compromised away.) And there's about a 1% chance of a genuinely good bill passing.
How did this craptastic state of affairs come to be? Without dragging this post out forever, here's a short list:
Two notable features of these lamentable facts.
First, they are structural. It's really hard to see what Obama or progressives can do to change them except at the margins. Too frequently people talk as though Obama or Waxman just aren't trying hard enough -- the Green Lantern theory of domestic politics. They aren't powerless, of course, and it would be nice if the progressive caucus learned to throw its weight around more. But the fact that the US system of government is riddled with procedural chokepoints is not something one can will away. The filibuster could theoretically be fought, but we seem to be a long way from that being a live possibility. And finally, it's hard to see what leverage Obama has over conservative Dem senators whose states didn't vote for him.
Secondly, on virtually every score, climate is worse off than health care. The right-wing is just as motivated and organized as they are on health, but the progressive coalition is fragmented. The policy options aren't as well understood; there isn't single rallying point equivalent to the public option. On climate/energy there are far more "centrists" in positions of power to appease to get to 60 votes. (And it's important to understand that "centrist" is a situational description. When Dems are in power, it means "a little weaker than whatever the Dems come up with" -- see: stimulus bill. When Republicans are in power, it means "a little closer to the Republicans than the other Dems" -- see: Bush tax cuts.) There's even less credible leverage over Dem senators; voting against Obama's climate agenda will not threaten the reelection of a single Southern or Midwestern Dem.
I'm afraid this is a depressing post, but it's just become clear that structural features of American politics make it so change averse that virtually no progressive electoral sweep is enough to do the job. And however difficult those features may be for health care, they're worse for climate. At this point, chances seem to be split pretty evenly between total failure and the passage of an utterly defanged bill.
Or as Jon Stewart put it: "And now, cap-and-trade -- naked, bruised, and humiliated -- is off to the Senate to get skull-f*cked."
Follow David Roberts on Twitter: www.twitter.com/drgrist
Being born with a middle-speed brain, they are the 30% of society who supervise, manage and law enforce the day to day affairs of our Empire USA. Problem is, they think to slow to out-smart the fast thinking rich, and think to fast and careless to grasp the harmful way they enslave the harmless, us the slow and careful thinking laboring class.
Most profound, we the 60% who hard labor generate all your wealth and you don't even know we exist. Don't even know we were the half of voters who stayed away from the polls last November.
We did elect Obama as an agent of change. He made clear promises.
But it is beginning to look like he is in bed with Wall Street, the insurance companies, Big Pharma and "Clean Coal"
Now he is backing down from the public insurance option and Gibbs is saying that is consistent with Obama's previous positions.
"That's why any plan I sign must include..... a public option......" That was as recently as July, 18., and he said it during the campaign also. It's on HuffPo:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/19/white-house-denying-its-o_n_262826.html
He has to talk directly to the public.
Obama needs to articulate the differences between his objectives and those of the special interests. If he does not squawk, and instead tells us what great deal we are getting, then he is a collaborator and it is not rape, it is adultery.
The Democrats needs to grow a pair of balls and just push through their agenda without fear of "offending" the republicans. Demographics favor the Democrats in the long run, so why this fear of offending the Republicans? Why do Democrats always worship at the altar of "bipartisanship" when the Republicans never do?
Democrats, you were put in office to change this country. Start making some damn change, or the only change next time will be your asses voted out of office... just like in the 90s.
Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Charles Schumer are supporting public option healthcare legislation. Both received more campaign contribution money from healthcare industries than any Blue Dog Senate Dem. New York is a blue state that supports government programs. Blue Dog Dems are from red states that celebrate unbridled individualism and are averse to government program. Senators vote according to the wishes of their respective state. It is nonsensical to want Blue Dog Dems to vote against the interests of the states they represent.
There is always a reality check in the face of bogus claims. Some of the Progressives behave like teenagers and hence their frustration in the face of political realities are very understandable. Let me cite few examples.
There is this illogical claim making rounds that President Obama has mandate per the last election. It is false. President Obama only won 28 states. President Johnson won 44 states; FDR won 42 states; Reagan won 44 states; Nixon won 49 states; George H.W.Bush won 40 states.
There are some Progressives who are always making reference to President Johnson’s legislative achievement on 1964 Civil Right Bill when comparing to how President Obama is dealing with healthcare legislation. In 1964, Democrats had 68 Senate Seats. LBJ won election with 61.1% votes. President Obama won with 52.9% votes. It is comparing apples and oranges.
Why hasn't the much hoped for Progressive Rapture occurred?
Well, it certainly isn't due to lack of faith!
But, the Democratic Presidential ticket in 2008 were not and are not progressives. They are at best moderate reformers.
There aren't that many progressives in the legislative branch.
There aren't that many real liberals in the legislative branch.
You won't need the ballroom at the Mayflower for the progressive/liberal caucus. A coat room will probably do the trick with room to spare.
There's a whole wing of the party Blue Dogs etc that are Democrats in name only..
I am beginning to think that Obama is a DLC corporate-appeasing Democrat. I hope I am wrong, but we have to look at the things Obama is doing that are outside of the control of Congress.
The Wall Street bailout: His agents did not negotiate the best deal for the public.
The Senate was not in control. He was in control, along with his Secretary of the Treasury (Geithner) and the rest of his crew.
I know we needed quantitative easing (deficit spendiing) to restore liquidity. However,
1.the bailout went to the wrong places - China did better
2. it was not accompanied by new regulations
3. there is not much transparency
4. and most important: Obama failed to use legal means to defuse the derivatives problem, which is still a looming threat.
Remember, FDR closed the banks. FDR would have stopped the derivatives with a moratorium.
Look up Light Pollution and start reading.
Remember "Earth Hour"?
We waste a heck of a lot...at least $10 Billion per year, on lighting including $8 Billion inside and at least $2 Billion on outside lighting.
Want to check my stats?
All you need to do is to check out the stars from suburban America...you can hardly see them because of Light Pollution....
Solution?
Turn off some uneeded lights, Use lighting fixtures that direct light down to the ground...where it is needed.
and then we spent a lot of time wondering why he didn't call us back. i've been disappointed in our own movement, for the lack of good language, that can effectively stand for something more progressive than obama, while still working with the white house and the congress.
obama is a process leader, who is aware that he needs to be inclusive of everyone, including the republicans and republican voters. he's trying to hear their voice, while bringing them real leadership--more than the gop really does for itself.
progressives don't even have that process leader who is listening to all our different voices, w/in the movement. we've been bogged down with our own discussions, and paralysed by the leadership vacuum from obama's promotion.
it's time to open up that little black book and do some calling ourselves. who are our sexiest leaders? ask them out. wear that black dress & go to that health care rally. call your senator and talk dirty about dirty energy and tell 'em to call u back anytime they like. get that webcam out and do some amateur vids. we can't just sit at home, waiting by the phone.
I call bullshit. Dubya was extremely effective at making horrible things happen. We can be extremely effective at making good things happen.
we elected a minority president who campaigned on CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN.
what did we get? a status quo president.
a Trojan Horse for sure.
God Help the US