iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Jane Hamsher

Jane Hamsher

Posted: March 1, 2010 11:41 AM

Accountability Recruits First Candidate for 2010: Bill Halter

What's Your Reaction:

Accountability Now is proud today to announce the first candidate we've recruited for the 2010 election: Arkansas Lt. Governor Bill Halter, who will challenge Blanche Lincoln for her Arkansas Senate seat.

Glenn Greenwald and I started Accountability Now in 2008 for the express purpose of recruiting primary challengers who would hold entrenched members of the DC establishment accountable for their actions. Too often incumbents have a stranglehold on their local party machines, and without hope of significant backing the candidates with the political experience to potentially defeat them do not want to risk their careers with a challenge.

We want to change that.

Blanche Lincoln stands for everything that's wrong with both parties: her primary loyalty is to her DC cohorts and her corporate donors, and she thinks it's her job to pick the taxpayer pocket on their behalf. As the head of the Agriculture Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, Lincoln has stood at the front of the line when it comes to repaying her corporate donors with political favors. She has personally been the recipient of big ag subsidies, and her continued tenure as Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee would mean the death of sustainable agriculture for a generation. She's the prime target for an accountability campaign.

Some in the media will try to paint this as a "purge" of "moderates" from the Democratic party. It's not. Blanche Lincoln is a radical corporatist. That's not the "center" of anything. Conservatives and liberals alike are tired of watching Senators like Lincoln raise millions in campaign cash and vote for one bailout after another, as if there's no connection.

Accountability Now's blueprint was inspired by the successful effort to unseat Al Wynn in 2007, when a coalition of progressive groups came together to support Donna Edwards. We first brought together representatives from organizations including SEIU, DFA, Daily Kos, MoveOn, the United Steelworkers, Color of Change and Blog PAC in early 2009 to talk about recruiting primary challengers for the 2010 race.

We are delighted that those efforts to draft Bill Halter and organize institutional support for his campaign led to his decision to enter the race. We look forward to working with the groups in Accountability Now and the people of Arkansas to support him in this race and to see him sworn in as the next Senator from Arkansas.

Donate to Halter's campaign here.

 

Follow Jane Hamsher on Twitter: www.twitter.com/janehamsher

 
 
  • Comments
  • 214
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
charles77
Just the Facts Please
01:03 AM on 03/06/2010
Beating up on Rahm Emanuel is the norm here I realize, but give Rahm credit, he is the one who got the Blue Dogs elected in the first place, he personnally recruited many of them. Why, because these are conservative districts and the ONLY way to get a Democrate elected in a conservative distrist is to run a moderate Democrate! DUH! If a Progressive would have run in those districts, the GOP would have won and gained control of Congress, is that better?
And there are benifits to having a majority with Dem by there name even if they don't always vote with you.
Example: Leadership positions with control of agendas, committee chairs with control of agendas ect.
Both parties get pulled to the center, always have, always will.
There are 20-30% on the far left and far right, with a big chunk in the middle.
When the Dems have a big majority, there are some DINOs (DEM in name only)
Example: Some pro-life Dems
When the GOP have a big majority, there are some RINOs (Rep in name only)
Example: Some pro-choice GOP
If you want a "big tent" it may not be filled with your closest friends, that's life
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ipanemagirl
progressive
12:24 PM on 03/03/2010
I hope we can replace all blue dogs with real progressive democrats so we can stand unitited and get things passed like we should! Also send a message to all these corrupt politicians that there are consequences for being a traitor!
charles77
Just the Facts Please
12:56 AM on 03/06/2010
Rahm Emanuel is the one who got the Blue Dogs elected in the first place, he personnally recruited many of them. Why, because these are conservative districts and the ONLY way to get a Democrate elected in a conservative distrist is to run a moderate Democrate!
If a Progressive would have run in those districts, the GOP would have won and gained control of Congress, is that better?
11:15 AM on 03/03/2010
I will not defend Blanche Lincoln. But I am getting really sick and tired of the so-called progressives whining about their agenda not being embraced by the Democrats and the President. The Democratic party has once again proved that it is unable to govern. There is no party unity or discipline when the things get tough, they have no spine when the public rages at them and the Republicans are going to kick their ass in November. Purging the party of moderates, centrists and right of center Democrats is not going to help the cause. The country is centrist, NOT progressive. The Dems lost control of the message early on with healthcare and come across as being out of touch. It doesn't matter what the Republicans do in opposition; at least you know where they stand. The Democrats? Who the hell knows! Finally the President is a realist, a pragmatist. He campaigned on changing the culture in Washington, but no President can do that. He is operating just the way you would expect if you had been paying attention. He said he would need help from supporters and he is not getting it. All of you who have and will turn away in a huff during special and mid-term elections will just facilitate the Republican victories.

Sorry to rant on, but I am disgusted with the Democratic party and all of you progressives who talk a good game, but do nothing to help Obama get anything done.
04:46 PM on 03/03/2010
Now c'mon Dave, that's not fair. Progressive Democrats have done more to advance Obama's stated agenda than the centrists have.

You say there's no party unity, and that's true. Some Democrats are wholly owned by the corporations and special interests, and some are not. I think its actually healthier to have different opinions within a party rather than be monolithic like the Republicans. Total party unity is what they had in the USSR, after all. I just wish that the differing opinions were on how best to help the citizens, not who to help, the special interests or the citizens.

You say we know where the Republicans stand? Not really, considering they have consistently voted against measures they co-sponsored. The stand for nothing but obstruction, because they'd rather score political points than govern. Don't give them any credit for that. Obama and the Democrats could introduce a bill saying puppies are nice and the Republicans would threaten a filibuster.

I don't believe this country is "centrist" at all. Polling has shown consistent support for such progressive ideas as universal health care, regulation of big business, alternative energy, public campaign financing, etc. Its only the chattering class inside the Beltway that thinks this is a centrist country, because its easier for them to split the difference between right and left rather than actually doing some journalistic work and finding the facts. Despite what conservatives may tell you, there are not Republican facts and Democratic facts, there are just facts.
06:17 AM on 03/03/2010
P: I'm happy you agree with me. Yes, let's get rid of those awful "Blue Dog" repubs, disguised as Dems. We need to clear out the obstructionist Dems, sitting there and working against our best interests. Out, I say, OUT.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
01:56 AM on 03/03/2010
Dear Jane,

Though I think I share your goals, I think that you and Glenn are starting at the wrong end.

If your concern is truly 'radical corporatists', then at least as I understand that term, you need to push campaign finance reform, and you need to do it now, immediately, before the 2010 elections, which will be enormously distorted by corporate funding.
07:08 AM on 03/03/2010
Sure, you have a lot of luck getting that through with every elected person in DC being bought a paid for. If you do get it trough the bought and paid for supreme court will knock it. Jane has the right idea...possibly the only one left next to revolution.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
10:12 AM on 03/03/2010
So the new boss will not be the same as the old boss, even though the new boss will be subject to exactly the same pressures and incentive structure?

No. As always, the incentive structure that hugely rewards bad behavior, in this case 'corporatism', needs to be the primary target.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:15 AM on 03/03/2010
Says Hamsher: "We first brought together representatives from organizations including SEIU, DFA, Daily Kos, MoveOn, the United Steelworkers, Color of Change and Blog PAC in early 2009 to talk about recruiting primary challengers for the 2010 race."

So the ultimate goal is to get candidates who are progressive. How about accountability for the politicians who are beholden to organizations including SEIU, DFA, Daily Kos, MoveOn, the United Steelworkers, Color of Change and Blog PAC? Those groups don't supply money and influence votes?
09:56 PM on 03/02/2010
I'm reminded of something out of a Kafka novel. "If you don't play it our way. The committee will see to it you don't play at all." The last time I checked, a Senator is supposed to vote for what's best for a state which may not always be in line with some spoiled, rich white girl who thinks she understands the environment better than the farmers who have to deal with it every day.

Your statement that this is not a purge of moderates rings hollow. Why make it if it isn't at least partially true? You're looking for any excuse to punish those who don't fully believe the committee mantra that the progressive ideal has to move forward at all cost. "Just put the policy in place! The people will see we're right once all the environmental rules and regulations are making things better for them." The problem is, that isn't the way democracy is supposed to work, but that's a minor issue, right?
07:10 AM on 03/03/2010
Blanche has done a bang up job for the folks in New Orleans tearing down their neighborhoods to give the land to big corporate sponsors.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
capitaldysfunction
White male never voted Republican
08:55 PM on 03/02/2010
No question Blanche the Corporate Shill was the candidate supported by party committees and the Obama administration.

Congratulations Jane Hamsher. You play the political game of chess well. This will help immensely to revamp the political landscape for the Rahm Emanuels and others seeking to prevent the change the American people so desperately want.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mjc
Avoid printing any..
07:14 PM on 03/02/2010
Lincoln certainly represents the brakes on any progressive reforms that were SUPPOSED to be coming in the Obama administration; you can smell the rubber hitting the highway. Under any circumstances, however, think Obama and his handlers would NOT be interested in someone with more guts and more commitment than Obama. Have my fingers crossed....
02:56 PM on 03/02/2010
A previous poster made a comment regarding:

"Uncontrolled free market capitalism gives to the wealthy at the detriment of the middle class and poor."

I just have to propose an alternative view.

It is a controlled and falsely called "free market" that has systematically transferred wealth from the masses to the rich. It has been the control of government and the media by corporations that is at the root of our troubles. Where examples of a valid free market exists you cannot deny the beauty of its efficiencies. Case in point, computers and computer software. IBM dominated but was replaced by Microsoft. Microsoft dominated but has been seriously challenged by Apple and others. All the while the technology has gotten better and the prices lower.

We can argue about whether a true free market is always possible but if/when it is there is no better system than free market captalism for promoting ingenuity and the proper setting of prices!.
03:30 PM on 03/02/2010
How do you suggest we keep the snake oil sellers from dominating the marketplace? They own the media so we won't even hear about the people they have already ripped off. A 'free market' cannot operate with monopolistic power in the mix. Money skews the system in favor of the most money without any regard for how that money was made. Without rules the cheaters will always win, with the slave owners having the cheapest labor costs. We would be dependent on being informed by those same elites. Just as we have now...
06:15 PM on 03/02/2010
You're right. Anti-trust, anti-monopoly laws need to be in place and appropriately enforced. The transfer of information needs to be open and transparent and not controlled - But most importantly people need to pay attention, stop spending ALL their time waching american idol and reading National Enquirer. Don't ask the free market or the government to stop those people from being fleeced. Hell, they deserve it!

It will be a constant struggle but there'so choice. You can't legislate morality or good behavior.
photo
kamachanda
Mr. President, Tear this Wall Street down!
06:41 PM on 03/02/2010
"A man rolled down the the window of a big black car and said 'How would you like to go to a place where everybody is fairies and we all eat candy all the time?'. I was home from college that weekend so...". Woody Allen.

It's the same place where that "valid free market exists (where) you cannot deny the beauty of its efficiencies". And they all eat candy all the time.
07:15 PM on 03/02/2010
So what's your hope - that our government will save and protect us?

Those that can do; those that can but don't like the pressure, teach; those that can't go into politics!

Rather than whine about how bad people are and how its hopeless to try how about putting up a little fight?
02:36 PM on 03/02/2010
It's nice to see the right terminology actually being tossed around finally.

For too long too many people have fought the energy-wasting war of dems vs. repubs or liberals vs. conservatves. The battle has always been a corporate-controlled government against a "of the people, by the people and for the people" government - and we the people have been getting our butts kicked!

Every elected official at any level of government who caters to a special interest and not to the constitution, the rule of law and wat is best for the masses MUST be dealt with. Even if it takes us one at a time.

The beauty of politics is that all we need to do is pull off a few key wins and the momentum will build, the sheople will jump on and any politician or aspiring politician will see the light.

Keep up the pressure folks.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:51 PM on 03/02/2010
"The battle has always been a corporate-controlled government against a "of the people, by the people and for the people" government - and we the people have been getting our butts kicked!"

I agree about there being a battle. But I think another battle has been the ever-growing power of the federal government versus the state and local governments - where the founders rightly wanted most of the power to be held. Though state and local governments are not immune to corruption and influence peddling, they pale in comparison to the crap that goes on in our nation's capital. Both the Democrats and Republicans are in it up to their eyeballs, especially those in leadership positions.

It is up to us as voters to call a halt to this nonsense and do our own purge.
11:44 AM on 03/03/2010
Agree wholeheartedly. I'm normally a fan of economy of scale but when it comes to government I'd rather see way more state and local power!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
01:16 PM on 03/02/2010
If you want to be anti-corporate, how about proposing what would replace corporations. Sole proprietorships, where every business is the property of an individual boss? To have a paradigm shift, you need to develop the new paradigm, not just oppose the old one.
03:37 PM on 03/02/2010
Local small businesses. Just what the corporate structure has been destroying for decades. And I don't consider 'franchises' to be the same as a 'mom and pop' store. A corporate franchise pulls money out of a community and sends it to the main office. Sure, they employ people in the community (when they aren't using illegals) but the 'profits' flow out of the community. Local businesses support much more than just a skeletal employee base.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
07:20 AM on 03/03/2010
A mom-and-pop car manufacturer wouldn't work very well.
07:16 AM on 03/03/2010
It would even help if we had corps. that were controled by the stock holders(not the mutual fund investor0 and not a small group of aristocrtat, old boy, ivy league do nothings.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dsws
No owning ideas. Limit only commercial use.
07:26 AM on 03/03/2010
Corporate governance is definitely a problem. Management shouldn't even be represented on the board, but we routinely have CEOs being the chair of the board. I suspect voting rights should go with some other financial instrument rather than with stock. Mutual funds and pension funds are the obvious owners of stock, and they have no interest in or aptitude for being activist shareholders.
photo
pdsimdars
Steel spine and golden aura.
11:10 AM on 03/02/2010
Thank you, Jane, for the work you do.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DevonTexas
Eternal Optimism
10:37 AM on 03/02/2010
"Blanche Lincoln is a radical corporatist. That's not the "center" of anything."
Thanks for making that point. When I read of her as being "centrist", I nearly wolfed my cookies. Your term "radical corporatist" is better suited to describe her.
11:42 AM on 03/02/2010
Is there a simple, clear definition of a "radical corporatist" dem with some tangible and observable criteria (e.g. certain aspects of their voting record, amount of $ received from specific types of companies, etc...)?

Is being against the PO an automatic qualifier?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
naschkatze
A free man creates himself.
12:14 PM on 03/02/2010
I think "centrist" is a tainted word too.
09:53 AM on 03/02/2010
Watch to see if Bill Clinton weighs in on this. I suspect that he will not, at least early on. He's a corporatist to the core, but he's shrewder than Obama, who was quick to kiss the foot that kicks him when he played the old boys game of supporting Incumbent Whoever. Could Bill Clinton swing a race in Arkansas? What will he do?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
naschkatze
A free man creates himself.
12:15 PM on 03/02/2010
I'd laugh if they brought in Bill Clinton as the heavy artillery and she lost anyway.
07:18 AM on 03/03/2010
Clinton is Obama's hero...closet corporate boys(republicans, bluedogs).