Hope on the Horizon

There's a relatively new player in the game to take down the duopoly. As stated on its website, the Centrist Project is a grassroots organization dedicated to organizing Centrist Americans, supporting Centrist policies and encouraging more independent candidates to run for public office to put our country ahead of any political faction in order to solve problems.

I've attended a few meetings/calls with the group and I believe they have a good shot at making something happen. Here's why:

1. Targeted strategy. Instead of making bland proclamations about changing the system for the better, the project is laser focused on demonstrating their fulcrum strategy here in CO by recruiting candidates for the 2018 state senate election. The idea is to demonstrate the strategy here to build attention and enthusiasm so they can replicate the strategy at the national level for 2020.  
2. They've done their homework. The project chose CO based on data crunching to determine where the strategy would most likely be successful. Furthermore, they have looked at what are the biggest barriers for independent candidates and will marshal the organization towards surmounting those barriers. Once candidates are vetted and endorsed, the project will pore in resources from the national level to give these candidates the resources and boots on the ground to make up for their disadvantages not running on the duopoly ticket.
3. Transparency. Unlike the failed Americans Elect, the Centrist Project appears to want to be transparent about their founders and therefore their intent. 

Not sure yet as to what extent I will get involved in the project for the next cycle, but I am excited by their prospects and hope you are too!

Trump Downfall Betting Pool

As first mentioned in a FB post, I've put together a betting chart as to when and how Trump will no longer be the 45th president of the United States. Instructions on entering the pool are below. All fees go directly to the charity of your choice. I will donate the prize money.

The pool has been moved to a FB page:

https://www.facebook.com/Trump-Downfall-Betting-Pool-233181863810290/

Trump and the Populists – Historical Parallels and Opportunities for the Modern Left

As progressive folks continue to despair at the election of Trump, it’s important to put his upset victory over Clinton into historical context. Ironically, Trump’s win reflects a particular cycle in American history that can be characterized as “reform moments,” or historical eras when social movements arose in response to the excesses of capitalism to demand government action to rectify or compensate for market failures. The Trump presidency may in hindsight be viewed as an echo of this cycle, and represents an opportunity for progressives to shape the forthcoming reform moment.

Prior reform cycles in American history include the Populists (1890-1912), the Progressives (1912-1938) and the New Deal (1938-1945). Of these cycles, the one most similar to now is the collection of social movements and political campaigns broadly referred to as the Populist movement of the late 19^th century. Driven largely by farmers in the mid-West and South, Populism was an agrarian revolt against the emerging corporate state of the gilded age and its creed of progress, and had the following characteristics similar to Trump’s campaign for the President:

1.       Economic crisis as antecedent

2.       Conspiracy as diagnosis (with racist overtones)

3.       Nostalgia as solution (through the exercise of state power)

Economic Crises as Antecedent

The period after the Civil War was marked by the expansion of industrialization, the creation of a national market, and the commercialization of the agriculture sector. Most farmers did enjoy a higher standard of living as a result of these changes, but often at the price of becoming heavily indebted to bankers, and farmers soon lost income and livelihood to the vagaries of the natural business cycle. This despondency reached its peak with the silver panic of 1893 when a crash in wheat prices led to a run on gold and then collapse of the financial sector. Thousands of businesses and banks closed, with upwards of 20% unemployment nationwide, and a significant number of farm and home foreclosures (Hicks 1988).

One need not look too hard to see the parallels with the Great Recession of 2008 when an overextended credit market combined with malfeasance led to another collapse of the financial system, followed by 10% unemployment, millions of home foreclosures, and a general downgrade in the standard of living for those most vulnerable to a credit crunch.

Conspiracy as Diagnosis

For those most directly affected by the economic crises of the late 19^th century, the reason for the crises was a conspiracy of monied interests (railroads, banks, and trusts) over the common man, leading to “a struggle between the robbers and the robbed.” An unfortunate and often overlooked aspect (Hofstadter 1988) of the Populist’s conspiracy theory was an overtone of anti-Semitism, with many allusions to “greedy Jews” determined to take away the hard-earned income of a struggling working class.

For the downtrodden of today, it is a conspiracy of East-coast elites and the media shoving trade pacts, open borders, and other neoliberal policies down the throats of those least able to withstand the negative effects of globalization. The apparent threat posed by immigrants gives the current conspiracy theory its racist overtones, as displayed in both Trump’s claim of Mexican rapists overwhelming the border or the explicit endorsement of his presidency by white supremacists.  

Nostalgia as Solution

The Populists were generally not looking to the future, but to a past that seemed to be fading away, an agrarian utopia founded on Jefferson’s myth of the moral superiority of the yeoman, and a value system that saw commercialism as a polluting influence on civic society. To get back to this idyllic past, the Populists called for an expansion of government powers to protect the right of laborers to organize, to mandate an 8-hour workday, and to restrict immigration. Populists also called for the adoption of a progressive income tax, initiative and referendum mechanisms, direct election of senators, term limits on the President, and abolishing corporate subsidies.

Trump’s frequent promises to “bring the jobs back” by withdrawing from trade pacts, brow-beating corporations, and other protectionist and anti-market policies are driven by nostalgia for a time after the second world war when most anyone without a college degree could secure nearly lifetime employment in the manufacturing sector, providing a comfortable if not prosperous standard of living. It is believed this “manufacturing utopia” can be brought back through state power to restrict immigration and otherwise disengage from the global marketplace.

The Populists Legacy and Looking Ahead

Though the Populists did not succeed as an independent political force, many of the reforms that originated with them were later enacted, taming some of the excesses of the gilded age. More importantly, the Populists laid the groundwork of a “movement culture” (Goodwyn 1988) that later-day activists across the ideological spectrum would build upon to push for political and social change. On the flip side, the racist parallels between the Populists and the Trump campaign demonstrates that there is still work to be done to overcome structural racism.

The take-home message for progressives today is that all is not bleak. The grievances that propelled Trump to the presidency are real, and even if his proposed solutions are mostly counter-intuitive to progressives, there is an opportunity here to harness these grievances to push for sustainable and effective change that will serve to correct the current imbalances in the system. And as recently pointed out elsewhere, the fight for racial justice can and should be considered a compatible goal with economic and political reforms.

References:

Goodwyn L. “Populism: Democratic Promise.” Conflicts and Consensus in Modern American History. Ed Davis A and Woodman H. 7^th edition. DC Heath and Company, 1988. Lexington, MA

Hicks J. “The Farmer’s Grievances.” Conflicts and Consensus in Modern American History. Ed Davis A and Woodman H. 7^th edition. DC Heath and Company, 1988. Lexington, MA.

Hofstadter R. “Populism: Nostalgic Agrarianism.” Conflicts and Consensus in Modern American History. Ed Davis A and Woodman H. 7^th edition. DC Heath and Company, 1988. Lexington, MA.

The 3 pillars of the duopoly

After another painful presidential election when voters were given a choice between two shades of the same oligarchy, it's time to revisit what reforms need to happen to dismantle the duopoly and give voters more choices at the polls and more possibilities for our system to better represent its citizens.

After looking through my prior posts regarding softball and hardball solutions, these 3 reforms I believe are the key ones that need to happen:

1. Declare that money is not speech and that corporations are not people. 
This is definitely a hardball solution as it will require amending the constitution. Thankfully, there is already a national, grass-roots organization working on this very idea. Move to Amend is doing a great job laying the groundwork that will be needed to pass an amendment because the only way it will happen is if ordinary people organize to overwhelm the oligarchy.

2. Create choice at the ballot box now
No 2 is between a hardball and softball solution in that it won't require an amendment to the constitution, but will require changes at the state level widespread enough to make a difference. There are many ways to create more choice at the ballot box now, but in my opinion, the quickest and most straight-forward is to push for ranked-choice voting, also called instant runoff voting. I'll let the experts at FairVote explain the concept. There is already movement on this issue as Maine just passed this very reform last month. One state down, 49 to go.

Some may point out that changing the electoral college should be the focus. Yes, changing the EC would create a better sense of fairness, especially as last month was the second election in recent times where the losing candidate won the popular vote. To me, changing the EC is just putting lipstick on the pig and our energy should be more focused on creating choice at the state level and that will percolate up to the EC in due time.

3. Open up ballot access for the long term
This last solution is a softball in that changes to ballot access are controlled through a myriad of state and local laws that can be changed on a local level, chipping away at the duopoly in the process. The high number of signatures required to be put on the ballot, the requirements of having a certain percentage of the vote in the previous cycle to be put automatically on the ballot for the next cycle, and other restrictions need to be fundamentally reformed or simply eliminated to open up the system to alternative parties. Signs of these reforms are sporadic at best and this one will take more time than the first 2 pillars to educate and organize.

The take home message is that stuff is already happening on knocking down these 3 core pillars of the duopoly and it re-energizes me to get back into the fight in the new year.

Duopoly Reform in Colorado

Happy Birthday America! 

Wonderful coincidence to also find out there are 3 initiatives trying to get on the ballot this November that will open up the primary process in a way to allow for more party choices. I would put this under the "softball" category of reforms as it does not address the fundamental barrier of single-district representation. Nonetheless, it is an excellent start. 

Initiative 112 is the most important one to bust the duopoly, but #113 and #114 would also serve to diminish the duopoly stranglehold on power. Below are the proposed ballot text from the group that is pushing these initiatives. As far as I can tell, the group is legit and not some corporate-funded sham.

Proposed Initiative 2013-2014 #112
Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning a two-round election system for federal and state offices, and, in connection therewith, replacing partisan primary elections with first-round balloting in which any eligible elector may vote; allowing the three candidates with the most first-round votes and any other candidate who earns at least 3% of the first-round votes to advance to the second-round general election regardless of party affiliation; conducting general elections by allowing voters to vote for and rank in order of preference up to three candidates per office; requiring tabulations until a candidate receives fifty percent of the votes; and specifying petition procedures for candidates?

Proposed Initiative 2013-2014 #113
Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the use of registered voter political affiliation as a factor in determining the boundaries of legislative districts, and, in connection therewith, requiring each congressional district and state legislative district to include registered voters from the two largest political parties and unaffiliated registered voters in percentages that are as equal as possible to the respective percentages of such voters statewide and specifying maximum variances in such percentages of three percent for Congressional districts and six percent for state legislative districts?

Proposed Initiative 2013-2014 #114
Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning a non-partisan Secretary of State, and, in connection therewith, converting, effective January 2017, the office of Secretary of State from a partisan elected office with a four-year term to an appointed office with a six-year term filled by the governor subject to confirmation by the state senate, prohibiting the person so appointed from having been involved in partisan politics during the prior three years, requiring the secretary of state to act in a nonpartisan manner when discharging his or her duties and to refrain from engaging in certain political activities, and restricting the grounds on which the secretary of state may be removed?  

Softball update: California's "2 past the post" primary system"

Among the softball solutions to the duopoly, changes to the primary election method seem the most promising way to enable more political competition. In 2012, California enacted an electoral reform called the open primary. The method (also used in LA and WA) allows whomever gets the 2 top spots in a primary (regardless of party affiliation) to be the 2 candidates that compete for the office at stake in the general election. 

As much as I applaud any effort to open up the electoral process, this reform only provides the appearance of greater competition. Beyond the awkward possibility of 2 candidates from the same party competing in the general election (which has already occurred), the open primary is flawed in that it assumes only 2 candidates are allowed to compete for 1 seat in the general election. In theory, anyone with enough energy and money can surpass the duopoly in the primary and win as an independent in the general election. However, due to institutional and cultural inertia, there is still too much incentive for only 2 parties to compete for that seat as it simply shifts the overwhelming money advantage of the duopoly from the general election to the primary. In the end, the open primary is limited by the single-member district model as instituted in the 1842 Apportionment Act and subsequent legislation.  

The solution to this conundrum? Ditching the single member district model in favor of proportional representation. This does not require a parliamentary system as there are plenty of ideas on how to create a more fair voting scheme than what we have now. The key will be creating the political will to make such reforms, which we know will not happen as long as the duopoly strangles the process as it is bankrolled by corporate interests. This brings me back to my current position that the best way forward is to amend the constitution to declare that corporations are not people and do not enjoy the same rights as humans. From there, we would have a realistic chance of passing the electoral reforms needed to rebirth our republic.

Revolution

The revolution that birthed this nation proclaimed a right to self-destiny. The civil war was the 2nd revolution, by proclaiming equality a necessary ingredient for liberty. The 3rd is upon us, as the private sector has usurped the political machinery to the point that it overshadows the state and drowns out civil society. The course we take from here will answer whether the collective will can correct the cumulative greed of individuals.