Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Whom did you elect? (Yourself.)

By

This is exciting, but it’s also daunting. Liberal politics used to involve trying to elect a hero to make everything OK. This is a remnant of at least two things:

  • The legacy of the 1960’s, when three genuine heroes (JFK, MLK, RFK) were assassinated, which made it possible for people to project their fantasies upon What Might Have Been; 
  • The alienation and complacency that liberals have felt as the result of Big Money and Big Media Politics since the Reagan years. I remember the euphoria and relief at Bill Clinton taking office, only to find that the GOP would try to take him down from Day One, and that the congressional Democrats were owned by many of the same special interests as the GOP. (Maybe it’s different now, and maybe not: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?)

So, as terrific as I think he is, it’s not about Deval Patrick from here on out. As GoldsteinGoneWild points out, there is tangible value to the networks you have created and the energy you have to offer. Make no mistake, it’s every bit as valuable as campaign cash, if not more so. I know GGW posits the “social capital” as a substitute for state spending, but I actually think it’s more valuable as a counterbalance to the old system of campaign cash as the currency of influence. The more Governor Patrick (and legislators) can afford to ignore entrenched and monied interests, the more likely they are to decide things on the merits. Crazy concept, huh?

This “new way of governing” can reach across ideological lines, since in the end, people care about what they know most intimately — themselves, their own families, their own health, their own jobs, their own roads, etc. That’s not something to be dismissed as “selfish”; rather, it’s an emphasis on practical matters that unites rather than divides. No one likes potholes, crime, or diabetes. But the task is to re-establish state government as an honest and effective actor in these concerns — not to be the benevolent Mr. Fix-It-All, but to help where it can and get out of the way where it can’t.

The Special Interest Right has done an excellent job in the last 30 years or so of trying to destroy the public’s faith in government. When the public loses faith, it loses interest and lowers expectations in government, thinking, “What the hell did you expect, anyway?” Of course, the special interests expect a lot. They step into the “expectations vacuum” and extract what they can. This explains everything from fat Teamster jobs at the Turnpike Authority to the billion-dollar boondoggle of Medicare Part D: Pols fear lobbyists more than an enraged populace.

That’s got to change. It’s not enough to merely expect a Governor Patrick to just deliver the goods single-handedly — even with a 20-point victory and a “mandate”, whatever that means. The hero-worship has got to end as of January 4, 2007. Think of it this way: We just elected ourselves Governor. It’s not just Deval’s ass on the line now, but all of ours. And we’ve got to get it right.

How does this new power center express itself effectively?

First, it must be growth-oriented and dynamic. There can be no sense that some are “in” and some are “out”.  In his victory speech, Patrick talked about creating bridges to those who don’t agree with the “progressive” line on any number of issues, or who aren’t interested in “politics” per se at all. Negotiators talk about the ZOPA, or Zone of Possible Agreement between bargaining parties. The new power base must reach out, expand and exploit the ZOPA with those who are not already inclined to be Patrick’s Kool-Aid drinkers. Again, enlightened self-interest and reciprocity may be the “in” with those folks: Who wants potholes or diabetes? Would you want someone else to have them? And go from there.

Second, it must be pragmatic, results-oriented and intellectually flexible. No interest group, however esteemed as a coalition partner, must be allowed to hold the rest of the populace hostage to a destructive policy. Also, it’s easier to identify problems than develop solutions, so we must be willing to swallow hard, give innovative approaches a try, and kick ineffective policies to the curb as necessary.

Third, the power base must be active, preferably pro-active: It must be willing and able to exert pressure on elected representatives at all levels, through phone calls, letters, emails, letters-to-the-editor, and yes, blog posts. Legislative action needs to strike the balance between coordinated and spontaneous: A variety of modes and spaces (real- and cyber-), coordinated in time, could be very effective, giving the hopefully accurate impression of a large number of disparate people all thinking basically the same thing. The coordination needs to be timely, which is difficult in the case of the state legislature, given the haphazard way things tend to be scheduled. It needs to be sensitive to leaders’ very human feelings: Some mild public embarassment may well be in order in the early stages, as long as the possibility of climb-down is left open. That “YOU BASTARD” letter or phone call can wait until last.

I’d love to hear suggestions as to how BMG in particular might become both more growth-oriented and outward-looking, and a more effective enabler of action going forward. I feel that to date, this site has been a terrific source of information and discussion; but perhaps it’s time to turn the corner from banter and raillery — however enlightening and fun — to exerting influence on what gets done.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. I applaud Deval Patrick’s grassroots strategy and hope that this movement continues to inspire the kind of widespread civic engagement like there always ought to be. Ideally, the electorate should stay energized whether there is an election going on or not, because everyone has a stake in making sure that government is working to improve their lives. As soon as you sit down and shut up, you lose the power to be heard and make a difference in policy decisions. Unfortunately, the DP campaign was the exception to the rule in the way they encouraged and listened to their grassroots supporters.

    Influence pedaling always works against the greater good. Special interests lobby hard to keep the laws working in their favor. This results in a more unfair, unjust, unhealthy, unequitable, uneducated, unhappy society than we deserve. To right this wrong, we should require that all campaigns depend on public financing and put stronger restrictions on PACs. We should increase the amounts that the state pays out to candidates because the extra cost will repay itself many times over in the quality of the candidates it produces.

    In order to get the BMG community to influence policy, it could

    • Allow members to sign on to petitions expressing support for or against certain policy initiatives. I imagine that a widely supported petition would garner media coverage and therefore affect policy decisions.
    • Alert the community to public hearings and other meetings at which the public’s opinion is requested on policy matters. If we all go to the meeting, then our collective voice will be that much louder.
    • Organize a syncronized communication blitz (email, phone, homing pigeon) on our politicians on a specific policy matter.

  2. You’re right that this isn’t only about one person. But it is also very much about that one person at the top.

    <

    p>
    Great leadership doesn’t end with one person. But great leadership does start with a great leader.

    <

    p>
    Great leaders listen, but also offer direction based on what they hear (and not simply what they want to hear).

    <

    p>
    Great leaders motivate others to become their best, and work with energy and enthusiasm.

    <

    p>
    Great leaders don’t micromanage, but they don’t simply operate in a hands-off manner, allowing everything to be decided by a group, whether the group is a popular opinion poll or a “network.”

    <

    p>
    Great leaders set tone and style. They bring attention to issues and help set both an agenda and how issues are discussed. The “network” can and should have input into all this, but I don’t think a collective can take over that roll from a chief executive. We can’t – and shouldn’t – sit back and expect Deval Patrick to do everything himself. But I wouldn’t minimize his importance in shaping how this unfolds.

  3. it’s all about civic engagement, and converting the grassroots into a way to govern.

    <

    p>
    If only someone were working on that!

    <

    p>
    Seriously, the outpouring of nearly 100 comments (so far) on the civic engagement thread is one of the most astounding things I’ve ever seen at BMG.  It gives me hope that this audacious project might actually work.  What a concept!

  4. has an interesting post regarding how the blog world needs to re-think our role as the new Congress comes into power. I think it has something to say as to what we are talking about here and in David’s post on Civic Engagement. Here’s some of it regarding lobbyists but I think this and the rest have application in state government as well:

    <

    p>

    Our problem essentially is we are the new critter on the scene, and we really have not estimated our worth.  Essentially, a legislator usually is a person with highly general knowledge about things they are asked to decide in law.  They may know little about an issue, or have just general and perhaps wrong-headed knowledge.  But they have to vote, and then defend that vote.  The Lobbyists not only provides a source of reliability and dependability that will defend in the public arena their position, but they of course also can provide campaign contributions to Leadership PAC’S  and campaign committees that thank the member for this or that vote.

    Against this reality it is up to us to design and execute something quite different.  It will never be the cow that delivers campaign contributions, but it can be something that has to be considered — namely a mechanism for sorting likely committee votes, and later floor votes, and matching them up with expert opinion that is unbought and unpaid that understands the nut issue of these votes.  To make this work, it has to be open — voters in each district need to be aware of the materials and arguments that have been presented to members before votes are cast, establishing the reasonable knowledge of members as they vote.  This is really the only way a citizen’s lobby as distinct from the K-Street Lobby can be effective.  It is the only way the matter of paid access can be broken up.

    <

    p>
    The caliber of people we have all met with and interacted with in on the blogs is extraordinary. There are people knowledgeable about almost every subject there is. I’d be surprised if we couldn’t find constructive ways of tapping into this resource reservoir.

    <

    p>
    It seems to me that using the flexibility of Wiki design would be the way to go at least from our end of it. How do we begin the dialogue with those who would be actually using the information and ideas that we generate? How do we find out what is most helpful for us to be working on? Are these the questions that you and David are trying to navigate your way through?

    • Thanks for the link, RevDeb.

      <

      p>
      There are two things going on concurrently: through David’s work on the transition Working Group, we’re trying to figure out how to turn the grassroots campaign into a “governance campaign”, if you will — as well as increase civic engagement throughout the state.

      <

      p>
      Pursuant to that, we at BMG (by which I include all registered users) need to figure out what our role is:

      • What we’ve been doing well already;
      • What we could do but don’t do particularly well or at all;
      • What we shouldn’t try to do, since we’re not likely to be effective at it.

      <

      p>
      I have been thinking about the issue of the timing of citizen involvement vis-a-vis the writing of legislation for a while now. That would seem to be one of the concerns of Sarah’s post. In the Massachusetts legislature it’s currently unclear — perhaps on purpose — what the legislature takes up and when. Having a better sense of timing can help us pry open that crack and let the light of our collective brilliance in. đŸ˜‰

      • …better hurry up!

        <

        p>
        Dec. 6 is the deadline for a bill to be filed timely for consideration in the 2007-2008 session; except for a bill filed by the Governor, all other bills are ‘late filed’ and ae sent to Rules, and may or may not be allowed out for a hearing, but may alguish as perpetual dockets.

        <

        p>
        I have one bill filed (blush) and if you have concrete ideas – SO SHOULD YOU!  Remember – it doesn’t have to be perfect, but can be gut-rehabbed any time in the two years if better wording, etc., comes to light!

  5. I’ve been deeply concerned, ever since the Dean days, about the degree of hero-worship I’ve seen in liberal and/or Democratic politics, but somehow have never managed to make the time to set down my thoughts coherently.  I agree wholeheartedly: anytime we put all our hopes in a single person, no matter how worthy, we’re going to be let down.  Even if we’re not let down while he or she is in power (assuming, for example, that we’re talking about a candidate for office), we will be when the successor isn’t an even greater hero.  I think Howard Dean is great, but the organization he built is more important.  I think Deval Patrick is great, but he can’t fix the whole state by fiat.  DfA did, actually, manage the transition away from hero worship pretty well, as Jim Dean has not been inclined to seek the spotlight as much as his brother — that’s hopeful.

  6. Is this a Robert Redford moment where in the classic film the Candidate a Deval-esque grassroots candidate wins and then asks after he’s elected “well what do we do now?”

    <

    p>
    I think the transition is working by getting both Republican, Democratic, and nonpartisan experts on various issues onboard and that this will help Deval and Tim form a successful cabinet and start fixing the problems and forging the solutions as they promised, that said I think having having a grassroots organization of people get behind a guy is great, or even get behind a group is great, but having them get in front of him and lead for him is akin to mob rule and remember not all of us bloggers are as expert as we think we are.

Archives