Report on our Special Meeting - 1/26/10

Last Updated on Friday, 29 January 2010 17:06 Written by John Hartwell Thursday, 28 January 2010 21:31

An emergency meeting of DFA was called to discuss the current disastrous state of our government.  The topics that were paramount for discussion were the Supreme Court decision regarding corporate financing, the election results in Massachusetts, the healthcare debacle and last, but by no means least, the lack of leadership by the majority of the Democratic Party.

Despite substantial majorities in both houses the Democratic Congress has, in many cases (healthcare, global warming, financial reform,) been unable to overcome either Republican opposition or the subversion of policy by its own party. The effect of the “New Democrats” in the House and the “Blue Dogs” in the Senate has undermined many progressive policies, often bringing legislation to a virtual standstill.  Instead of standing their ground, Democrats have capitulated to the corporate power-brokers. This basic lack of backbone appears to be the major cause of Democratic and Independent disaffection with the current administration.

Money blocks, or creates legislation and the Democrats have succumbed to the illusion that, unlike Republicans, they have not been corrupted by Corporate Lobbyists and interests.  The Supreme Court decision giving Corporations the right to unlimited spending serves to legalize the heretofore subversive and little recognized control of Congress by said corporate entities.  In fact, both Parties are equally subservient to moneyed interests and the corporate control of their vote.  It is a decision that has outraged public citizens sufficiently enough to organize protest around this issue.

 

Can the law be changed?  Not soon and not easily.  A constitutional amendment is unlikely and other avenues – stockholder voting on how funds are spent or changing legislation are all long-term and time consuming struggles.

The buying of Congressional favors is systemic and is not entirely new however, in the past two decades this practice has become more prevalent and its practitioners more skillful at hiding the fact that a bought and paid for Congress is likely to destroy the meaning, intent and practice of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  In effect, we have reached a tipping point.  Rather like a snowball rolling down hill the corruption of money is becoming larger and larger as it careens toward the crash at the bottom that will destroy it.

It was pointed out that Fascism has five easily recognized objective and distinct phases, and judging by current conditions in this country we are at stage three!  Now is the time to wake up and fight or we will descend – as did Hitler’s Germany – into chaos.

Instead of cooperating on at least a basic level the two parties (and their internal dissention) have become ever more polarized and this affects all issues of legislation.  Because neither Congress nor the public are able to reach a practical consensus, the fabric of Democracy is starting to shred.

The conundrum now is how do we as Democracy for America proceed as an organization?  The political climate has deteriorated sufficiently for us to reconsider whether or not we should continue as an organization that only supports Democrats or should our energy be more focused on basic progressive policy regardless of Party?  And how would we achieve this goal?  We start by pushing back!

DFA has tended to focus on winning elections for local, state and federal candidates however, the progressive change that our society needs should be a long-term and ongoing enterprise.

Reaching out to other DFA members, particularly those in Connecticut should be our first step and it was agreed that those present would begin to work on achieving this end.  Additionally, we should reach out to work with organizations where we may not agree on every issue but can work with in certain areas.  The Supreme Court decision that appears to have caused consternation for many conservatives as well as progressives is an area where cooperation on certain joint issues becomes possible with those who have a somewhat different agenda.

In this regard, Jim Dean has been approached to talk about how this can be accomplished.  National DFA has, at this time, formed no policy.  It was noted that even in the DFA membership there appears to be a divergence between the National office where fundraising and “doing the right thing” have created a dissonance and distance with the more grassroots membership.

Getting progressive hands back on the “Wheel of Power” is something that must start at the grassroots.  Difficult though it may be, getting people to run for local office is key to changing the system. As former chief Justice Sandra Day O’Conner has been saying on her lectures around the country, money is buying the local justice system and that is the fight we must start with. This is not to lose sight of what is achievable. Basically we need to pick our fights.

Do we want to have a large influence on a very targeted political issue or less of an influence on a larger issue? Can we come together sufficiently to issue a “primal scream” about “having enough” and even if we do is the fawning corporate media is likely to carry that news? Probably not!  How do we disseminate information regarding the dangerous influence of money on our Democracy?

Although, in this country, a third party was once successful, it is highly unlikely that any third party today has the financial backing or movement strength to significantly impact national policy in the near future.  Should this preclude present efforts to work for – or with - a third party or would such efforts be counter-productive?

The Working Families Party (Jon Green) representative present at the meeting believed that  Democratic and WFP ideals are not incompatible.  WFP works only with economic issues, not social or foreign policy problems.  Because the WFP cross endorses mostly Democratic candidates who espouse their economic principles it was able to influence election outcomes in several CT districts.   Working more closely for a more pro-worker and economically equitable status would of benefit to both parties. The values for which WFP stands can appeal to a diverse group of voters and DFA can benefit from the same “big tent” approach.

There was significant disappointment with Jim Himes and the fact that he still seems to be unduly influenced by his Goldman Sachs financial support.  While he has supported healthcare reform, and in particular cost control, he has done little to layout or explain an agenda for achieving these goals.  Although no-one thought that he was a raging liberal his-middle-of-the road (bending more to the right than the left!) stance is particularly distressing to those of us who worked hard on his campaign believing that he had a more progressive agenda than he has since demonstrated.

The President has also caused the Democratic base – and many Independents who voted for him – to question their support.  Again, no-one believed that there would be a miraculous turnaround, the country had been brought to its knees financially, two illegal foreign wars were being fought, the opposition was bitter and belligerent and jobs were falling away like leaves off a tree in Autumn.

What Democrats did expect was that, with a large majority in both houses and a popular, thoughtful and intelligent Democratic president, we could finally get the ship of state on the right course.  Instead, we have an aloof President who gives great and inspiring speeches and then goes back on his promises, both those implied and those given.  No guidance or particular stand on healthcare, the bill was allowed to be diluted to death and even his promise of a “public option” – a centerpiece of his campaign promise has been eliminated.  Secret deals with insurance and pharmaceutical corporate giants took precedence over the best deal for the public.

There is a general perception that Obama’s decision to send more troops to Afghanistan is ill advised and will in no way contribute to ending terrorist threats, although it will further impoverish the country.  The bank bailout was not a “people” bailout.  The “experts” that got the country into such deep financial trouble, (Sumners, Geithner et al) were selected as Obama’s advisors rather than economists like Krugman or Stiglitz.  Banks were lent enormous sums of money with no conditions or restrictions.  Rather than using the money to support businesses so that people had jobs big financial institutions put the money in their own pocket and have continued their usurious practices ignoring the need to get that money back out into the economy. This short-sighted approach has caused many people into foreclosure, many businesses to fail, and put more people out of work.

Although there is indeed greater transparency in some areas again, the President has failed to live up to his promises on other very important issues.  For example he has failed to enlighten the public sufficiently on issues on torture or to call out and punish those who instigated the torture programs. Obama’s lack of common-sense and, when necessary, confrontation with recalcitrant members of his own party, has left many in the Democratic Party disheartened, disgusted and disengaged.  In essence, he has provided no clear stand on a majority of vital issues, no strategic clarity and has failed to make his expectations clear, thereby providing the necessary guidance to Congress.

Finally it was agreed that a formal “statement of purpose” would be drawn up and that further discussion would revolve around what it is possible for DFA to achieve.  A phone bank to establish contact with DFA members and other organizations will be established.

Ned Lamont will be the speaker at DFA’s regular monthly MeetUp on Febraury 3^rd, and Jim Himes and Jim Dean will attend a special DFA meeting on February 15^th.