http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=fire_on_the_left 


Fire on the Left 
  
Tea Partiers are getting all the press, but it's the anger on the left that 
spells trouble for Dems in the midterms.  
  
Robert B. Reich | August 2, 2010 




A friend whom I'll call David raised a ton of money for Democrats in 2008 and 
now tells me they can go to hell. He's furious about the no-strings bailout of 
Wall Street, the absence of a public option in health reform, financial reform 
that doesn't cap the size of banks or reinstate the Glass- Steagall wall 
between investment and commercial banking, and a stimulus that was too small to 
do much good but big enough to give Republicans a campaign issue. He's also 
upset about tens of thousands of additional troops being sent to Afghanistan, a 
watered-down cap-and-trade bill that's going nowhere, and no Employee Free 
Choice Act. David won't raise a penny this fall and doubts he'll even vote. "I 
busted my chops getting them elected, and they caved," he fumes. "They're all 
lily-livered wimps, and Obama has the backbone of a worm." 


Tea Partiers are getting all the press. But the anger on the left, including 
much of the Democratic base, is almost as intense. And it spells trouble for 
Democrats a few months from now. 


The pattern isn't new. I remember a gloomy fall 16 years ago when as secretary 
of labor I traveled around the country trying to rev up the base for the 1994 
midterms. I found anger and disillusionment then, too. Of course, Clinton 
hadn't accomplished nearly as much as Obama. In fact, he'd pushed initiatives 
like NAFTA that infuriated the base. 


When Republicans control Congress or the White House, their base can get 
restless but doesn't seem to suffer the same disillusionment. Republicans stood 
by Ronald Reagan in the 1982 midterms and rallied enthusiastically for his 
re-election in 1984. They were out in force for George H.W. Bush's 1990 midterm 
as well as George W. Bush's in 2002 and his 2004 re- election. Why the 
asymmetry? 


First, the Republican base keeps the heat on after elections so Republican 
officeholders accomplish what they promise and are less likely to compromise in 
the first place. The Republican base fueled the Reagan and George W. Bush tax 
cuts and penalized George H.W. Bush only after he reversed his "read my lips" 
pledge not to raise taxes. 


The Republican base is part of a conservative movement. The Democratic base, by 
contrast, is a loose coalition that elects a new president and then goes home, 
expecting the new president to deliver miracles. 


When I ask David what he's done over the last 18 months to push for a more 
progressive agenda, he says he e-mailed senators in support of a public option 
and signed a Sierra Club petition for cap-and-trade. "On Afghanistan I even 
called the White House to tell the president not to send more troops. What else 
am I supposed to do?" 


David thinks of himself as an individual with strong progressive views about 
specific issues rather than as a member of an ongoing movement with a larger 
vision of what America should be. 


Washington's network of progressive advocacy groups is just like David. Each 
has a narrow bandwidth (health, environment, labor, women's rights) with a 
national constituency that donates money and sends members of Congress e-mails 
as requested about particular initiatives. 


These groups are staffed by overworked 20-something's and headed by people who 
enjoy being minor celebrities at Washington fundraisers and occasional visitors 
to the White House. But these groups don't mobilize people back where they 
live, and they're no substitute for a broad progressive movement. 


A movement connects the dots across issues and reveals a larger wrong that must 
be righted. When it comes to misuse of power, Americans carry two deep-seated 
fears -- of big government taking over and of big business and Wall Street 
running amok. Both are sometimes justified, but the political response is 
lopsided. The conservative movement adeptly fits almost every morsel of news to 
the first fear, giving its members an animating cause: Reduce government. 


A progressive movement would focus on the second fear, seeking to protect 
average working people from the depredations of big business and Wall Street. 
Given what has occurred in recent years -- from Enron and WorldCom through the 
devastation brought on by Wall Street, to the price- gouging by health insurers 
like WellPoint and Big Pharma, right through BP - - there is no absence of dots 
to be connected. 


With the election of Barack Obama, many on the left found comfort in the belief 
that a single man could make transformative change without powerful tailwinds 
behind him. But that was a pipe dream. Rather than feel discouraged and angry 
by a president and representatives that seem to bend to the prevailing winds 
from the right, David and others like him must drum up a storm. 

***

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 4:22 PM
Subject: Congresswoman Waters Challenges Investigation
To: 



Please forward. This is ridiculous.  By this standard all legislators who have 
defense stocks are guilty too. (Or obeissance to Wall St., G St., Big Oil, et 
al. -Ed)



Dorothy Reik
PDSMM
818-226-6100 
818-226-6111 fax


Please feel free to share.                                                      
                                                       

  Blanca Jimenez
  District Director
  Office of Congresswoman Maxine Waters (CA-35)
  10124 S. Broadway, Suite One
  Los Angeles, CA 90003
  Ph: 323.757.8900 ext. 11
  Fax: 323.757.9506

  Sign up for Congresswoman Waters' newsletter


  PRESS RELEASE
        August 2, 2010
        For Immediate Release Contact:  Michael Levin
        Phone:  (202) 225-2201 

  Congresswoman Waters Challenges Investigation
  “No benefit, no improper action, no failure to disclose, no one influenced: 
no case”
  Washington, DC – Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA) issued the following 
statement today:
  “I have not violated any House rules. 
   
  Therefore, I simply will not be forced to admit to something I did not do and 
instead have chosen to respond to charges made by the House Committee on 
Standards of Official Conduct in a public hearing.
   
  Starting with the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) report released today, 
the record will clearly show that in advocating on behalf of minority banks 
neither my office nor I benefited in any way, engaged in improper action or 
influenced anyone. Additionally, the OCE acknowledges that I have fully 
disclosed my assets as required by House rules, even going above and beyond the 
requirements by disclosing my assets at several Financial Services Committee 
hearings. In sum, the case against me has no merit. 
   
  The accusations against me stem from work I have done throughout my decades 
of public service as an advocate for minority communities and businesses in 
California and nationally.
   
  As the financial crisis was unfolding, jeopardizing the health of banks large 
and small, the National Bankers Association (NBA), a trade organization which 
represents the interests of more than 100 minority-owned banks, requested a 
meeting with Treasury Department officials. It is important to clarify that 
this meeting was requested and scheduled on behalf of the NBA, not on behalf of 
OneUnited Bank as has been suggested. 
   
  A letter from NBA to Treasury, included in the OCE report (see page 39), 
dated September 6th, 2008, requesting the meeting indicates the intent of the 
meeting and the dire concern expressed by the association on behalf of its 
members. The NBA contacted Treasury directly, just as other trade associations 
did, to request a meeting so that its members could discuss their concerns 
regarding the crisis facing minority banks. I followed up on the association’s 
request by asking then-Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to schedule such a 
meeting, as did other members of Congress. Secretary Paulson recognized that 
the NBA’s concerns about the future of minority banks were valid and arranged 
for a meeting.
   
  I did not attend the meeting and thus did not participate in the 
conversation. The OCE focuses on concerns expressed during the meeting between 
NBA and Treasury on behalf of a single bank. However, NBA’s follow up letter, 
dated September 10, 2008 and also included in the OCE’s report (see page 59), 
to Treasury reiterates the organization’s concerns about the fiscal health of 
its members generally.
   
  Despite this evidence, the committee is arguing that I was not acting to help 
minority institutions and the constituents they serve but instead that I was 
trying to help OneUnited (in which my husband held investments) -- and that 
doing so violated House rules related to personally benefiting from official 
actions and conflict of interest.
   
  However, the suggestion that I gained personally by assisting the National 
Bankers Association in getting a meeting with the Treasury Department is not 
credible.  Even the OCE acknowledges that the meeting resulted in no action. 
Although it leveled the accusation, the OCE also failed to show that I received 
any benefit or engaged in any “improper exercise of official influence.” 
   
  The OCE has drawn negative inferences where there are none and twisted facts 
to fit its faulty conclusions. After a lengthy investigation, the report 
released today only shows:
   
  No benefit, no improper action, no failure to disclose, no one influenced: no 
case. 
  Although I am not convinced that the process for investigating and examining 
House ethics cases is fair, I welcome the opportunity to show my constituents 
and the American public that the accusations against me are frivolous and 
unfounded.”  
  ###


  If you would rather not receive future communications from House of Rep: 
Office of Maxine Waters, let us know by clicking here.
  House of Rep: Office of Maxine Waters, 2344 Rayburn Building, Washington, DC 
20515 United States



_______________________________________________
PDLA mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.svpal.org/mailman/listinfo/pdla


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to