For the last couple days we have been collecting survey results from our supporters and members on everything from the issues Change Congress should be focused on to how to organize for the coming year. We've enjoyed reading through the responses and well-thought out answers to our questions. We'll be taking these survey results and comments on our retreat this Monday and Tuesday.
A big thank you to those who took the time to respond and toss your hat in the ring. The honesty and thoroughness in the answers revealed a lot about where our community fell on key issues. Many of these issues are not as cut and dried as we'd like and the answers reflect a desire to know more as well as understanding the complexity behind them. Below, I've highlighted some of the comments and feedback.
In response to the question, "Do you think that public financing of elections will help limit the influence of money on our politics?"
- "I want to understand more before I state an opinion. I need help. I need a source that puts the issues in focus and feeds me all sides of the story without paralyzing my judgment with too much information. "
- "I don't like the idea of candidates being beholden to individuals or organizations that donated them large amounts of money as opposed to the broader needs of their constituents. However, I know that I don't want millions of taxpayers' dollars to go towards elections - there should be caps, at least to some extent. "
- "No. Note that I agree with the word "help" in the question, which is not in the answer."
"Do you believe that earmarks are fundamentally wrong or just need to be more open and transparent for the public to see?"
- "The system needs to be cleaned up so that all those expenditures can get proper scrutiny without a lot of political maneuvering and endless delays. Seems more and more that the effectiveness of our legislative process depends directly on a number of arcane rules and customs in the U.S. Senate."
- "I believe that if earmarks are going to exist, they ought to be transparent. That said, I would like to see all bills being only about the subject that they are about, instead of having riders attached."
- "Nothing is 100% wrong or right. Earmarks have their use and full and timely transparency should check abuses."
- "I think earmarks are fundamentally wrong, but only as a process. The actual programs are oftentimes correct, and worthy of funds. But that should be decided based on merit and promise, not on political clout. Things like Infrastructure need to be build, but which projects get built should be done by a non-elected board, to avoid corruption or the appearance of corruption."
"What is the one thing you would do to create a more open and transparent government?"
- "All info must be available on the web within a short time. "
- "It's fairly open and transparent now for the legislature, with cspan covering everything (perhaps too much - prevents free discussion."
- "I would suggest a daily e-mail to all constituents listing the complete activity of an elected official the day before. "
- "Send a letter to explain to each taxpayer where his own various taxes have gone(we don't even know at the city level because the sources of money for the city are too complex)."
- "Mandatory helmet cams. If we can't get that, Term Limits."
"Do you think lobbyists have a role in government?"
- "Lobbyists are the single most major flaw in the US government."
- "This is a tough one. Our democracy and principle of freedom of speech pretty much demands that we not eliminate lobbying altogether. At the same time, it badly needs reform. Don't have a clue how to approach that reform."
- "We are all members of "special interests" and it is our right to lobby for our interests vigorously. Limiting this limits our access to an open government."
- "Lobbyists should provide information, not money."
Change Congress founder Lawrence Lessig was on Charlie Rose tonight. If you missed it, you can watch the interview here.
About 36 minutes in Lessig says this:
"I think in the next cycle, what you see in the way that politics functions will be unrecognizable even from today. But when we're there, it will be a revival of ideals, of aspirations about democracy that will surprise us. The cynicism that we had in the 20th century will look very 20th century."
On changing the influence of money and public funding:
"So you add the bottom-up Obama part, the people-money part, to the public funding money part and put the two together. And that system is a system where you know that the politician is not worrying about money when the politician is making a judgment. He might be worried about how to remain popular but thats exactly the type of dependence we want to create. We want the member to worry about whether he has enough votes, or she has enough votes in her own district. Thats the kind of fear that should be the focus, not whether the lobbyists from Exxon will still be happy with this person after he votes one way."
It's official: Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich has defeated convicted felon and long-time Senator Ted Stevens for Alaska's other Senate seat, making him the next Junior Senator from Alaska.
With this victory, Democrat Mark Begich has defeated one of the giants in the U.S. Senate by a 3,724-vote margin, a stunning end to a 40-year Senate career marred by Stevens' conviction on corruption charges a week before the election.
A real victory in the fight towards ending corruption in Congress! Thank you good people of Alaska.
President Elect Obama, during his campaign, pledged for sweeping ethics reform under his administration. Now, as he mounts his transition team he has created “the strictest, the most far-reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history.” So says John Podesta in today's New York Times article.
Obama and his co-chair of his transition team Jon Podesta are abiding by the same principles that guided his campaign for more than two years. What's important here is that the President-elect is taking the necessary steps to clean up the way Washington works by drawing a line between special interests and the government.
Under the rules announced by Mr. Podesta, federal lobbyists will not be allowed to raise money for the transition, nor continue lobbying while working in the transition. In addition, he said that someone who became a lobbyist after being involved in the transition would be prohibited from lobbying the administration on related matters for 12 months.
The goal in this move appears to be two-fold:
(1) to attract those to government who's premier purpose is to serve the public interest, not make a profit.
(2) to earn the trust of the public by slowing the "revolving door" between government and the private sector. This administration understands that restoring trust in government is the most important element in developing sound policies, and for that we applaud them.
Some say this move comes at great expense. It will prevent people with much knowledge and experience on key issues like healthcare and global warming from serving immediately. I would argue that its a worthy expense. As the Brookings Institution's Thomas Mann said, "That is a real cost but it is more than balanced by the strong signal sent by the President-elect. He aspires to attract to government able individuals whose highest priority is to serve the public interest. This is a very constructive step in that direction."
Yet, it's not possible to cut every cord strung between government and the private sector. Just today one of Senator Obama's advisors was reportedly on the board a defense contractor. Former Georgia Senator Sam Nunn is currently serving as Chairman of Public Responsibilities at General Electric, a company that has received $8.8 billion in over 280 defense department contracts. Obama's transition team had no comment about weather this was a conflict of interest, but did say that Nunn's role was "informal" and that he was considered an "outside adviser." Whether or not this is seen as conflict of interest need not supersede the fact that the only reason it is considered such is because of these new self-imposed ethics rules the Obama transition team have adopted.
We do hope that these new rules are obeyed and not bent to accommodate the desired needs of the transition team. After all, the problem with self-imposed rules is that the only one enforcing them is the one who needs them.
Lessig has an article in this month's Stanford Magazine highlighting what happens when the engine of democracy (specifically Congress) contains a flaw. And that flaw is the "first problem." From the end of the article:
The flaw at the core of the People's House is dependency. Think of the dynamic of the dependency of an alcoholic. The alcoholic may be losing his family, his job, his liver, but we all know he will not solve any of those problems unless he solves his alcoholism first. It's not that alcoholism is the most important problem; it's just the first problem he needs to solve if he is to solve the rest.
There is no end to the problems that we as a nation face—from global warming to Iraq to the economy to media reform to education to broadband growth, even to copyright—but we will not address these problems sensibly until we solve this first problem: our own alcoholism, our own dependency on the way money has corrupted this government.
Corruption, lack of public trust and transparency, and a failure to get the easy public policy decisions wrong all contribute to this flaw.
Senator Barack Obama also mentioned recently what he thought was "flawed" about the Constitution.
This brings up an interesting point: Has calling to question elements of our own Constitution become improper and frowned upon? Are we willing to accept any potential inequalities or, "flaws" in it or do we treat it as the Gospel? The fact that we've amended it twenty-eight times shows that we're willing to add necessary changes calibrating it to a society that is constantly progressing and moving forward.
What will the next amendment be, you might ask. We're hoping that it has something to do with corruption -- it's oldest foe. More from Lessig:
It's not very PC to say, but let's say it: they failed. Many who went to government were drawn for the most venal of reasons. Corruption was at the center of government throughout the country for most of our history—much worse than anything we've ever seen.
Daniel Webster, who served in Congress when Congress was considering whether or how to regulate the Bank of the United States, was paid by the Bank of the United States. He wrote to the Bank: “If it be wished that my relation to the bank be continued, it may be well to send me the usual retainers.”
After more than two-hundred years its time to make the Constitution work for the people again. Its time to close the loopholes and begin to tackle this new challenge. Fixing this flaw is the first problem. If we can solve this first problem, we can solve the many others that face us as nation, be it global warming or healthcare.
Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was found guilty on seven counts of corruption this week, but he's refusing to step down--even though politicians from both sides of the aisle have called on him to resign. Yesterday we sent an email to friends and supporters of Change Congress, asking folks to watch our "Farewell, Ted" video and sign on to a petition demanding that Senate leaders remove him from office.
Here's the text of the email, with links:
Dear Supporter,
Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) was found guilty on seven counts of corruption this week[1], but, he's refusing to step down. Politicians from both sides of the aisle, including Barack Obama and John McCain, have called on him to resign. It's time to add your voice to the mix.
Click here to watch our video, "Farewell, Ted." Then sign our petition calling for Senate leaders to remove him from the Senate:
"He has broken our trust. It's time to let another Alaskan step up and represent the Last Frontier state. For this reason, we are calling on you to remove him from the Senate. Joining with both presidential candidates Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain we are requesting that you not allow a convicted felon continue to serve as a U.S. Senator."
Now that Ted Stevens has been convicted of corruption, he has no place in the Senate. The American people demand leaders who work for us, rather than abusing our trust. If Stevens does not resign, he must be removed from office.
We'll deliver copies of this petition to leaders in the Senate, including Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), whether or not Stevens is still serving next week. Help us send the message that corruption in the Senate will not be tolerated.
Ted Stevens received all kinds of gifts that he didn't disclose: A $1,000 sled dog. A $3,200 handmade stained glass window. A $2,695 massage chair. Not to mention $250,000 in labor and materials for Stevens' vacation home from Veco Corporation, an oil-field service company.[2] All this for keeping his friends at Veco in mind when he went to Washington and allocated over $88 million in earmarks to just one bill that came before Congress. [3]
Our Senators should not be for sale, whether for the price of a massage chair, a vacation home, or anything else. Click the link below to watch our video, and then help us say "Farewell, Ted" once and for all.
Japhet, Stephanie, Monica and the Change Congress Team
Sources:
1. "Stevens guilty on all counts, campaign to continue," Associated Press, Oct. 28, 2008.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5je6Pw1sViz24JRo9F0PNhoqMtzTwD94349103
My interest has been peaked of late. What is the fate of publicly funded campaigns given the "Obama phenomenon?" A recent NPR article Did Obama Kill Public Campaign Finance? asks the question, "Is something rotten in the state of public financing for presidential campaigns?"
The article continues:
Sen. John McCain, one of the most vocal proponents of campaign finance reform, is being hoisted by his own petard by choosing to accept federal funding for his general election campaign. Meanwhile, Sen. Barack Obama, the choice of the Democratic Party — the very party that cried out for finance reform in the wake of the Watergate scandal — has chosen to bypass public funds and, as a result, is pummeling McCain in the fundraising arena.
Irony alert: The Republican standard-bearer is using federal grants, while the Democrat extols the free-market virtues of individual campaign donations.
One could argue that Obama's campaign is 'publicly funded,' after all, he and the DNC have forgone Lobby and PAC money and the majority of his campaign contributions come from small donations made by lots of people. However, the "Obama phenomenon" does not take into account an average person seeking office. This is where public funding would level the playing field so that ordinary citizens could run for office. Obama's 'star quality' and fund raising ability, plus the current political climate, cloud the argument for killing public funding.
McCain opted in to public funds, thus agreeing to cap out at $84 million for his campaign. The RNC supplements his allocated funds by raising money and they do take Lobby and PAC money. Neither candidate, in my opinion, represents 'clean money.'
No matter which candidate wins the White House, both will be faced with determining the fate of public campaign financing, in fact, both have an obligation. At Change Congress, we would also argue that the issue needs to go beyond Presidential and on to Congressional elections -- a more difficult battle.
A smart conversation took place on KQED's Forum with Scott Shafer. I encourage you all to have listen and weigh in on the conversation through our comments section. Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics is on the panel and directs people to the OpenSecrets site so you can follow the money yourself. You can listen in below:
Just over 6 months ago, I agreed with Joe Trippi to help start a movement for fundamental reform in Congress. We understood that this was a long term project. But as we felt then -- and as the events of the last 6 months only confirmed -- we face, as Al Gore has put it, "a democracy crisis." And until we fix this, we won't fix any of the critical problems that face our society.
Many of you urged me to do this. And so I'm asking now for a favor in return. We've started. We've made important progress. But we need you now to help us make an important mark before this election comes to an end.
Our first project has been to get Members of Congress as well as candidates for Congress to take a stand on our issues of reform. We don't demand that they agree with any particular reform (yet). We simply call upon them to have the courage at least to say where they stand.
The five people you see pictured above are the first five Members of Congress to take a stand: Barney Frank (D-MA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Jim Cooper (D-TN), Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD), and John Tierney (D-MA). Four Democrats and one Republican have signed a pledge to support planks in our platform for reform. These 5 are joined now by more than 150 challengers who have taken a stand.
That's a start. But it's not good enough. And so I'm asking again: please help us get Members and candidates to take a stand. You can join our "pester" campaign by clicking here, and we'll make it extremely easy for you to write, or call, or email members or candidates who have not yet taken a stand.
This should be a simple thing in a democracy: Tell us, candidate, what you believe. It should be a hard thing to hide from. Yet in the politics of today, the simple thing is to hide. Help us make the simple hard.
We wanted to be sure everyone knew about a new organization in Canada that is mirroring the work Change Congress is doing. I Believe in Open Canada is building off of the Change Congress model tailored to their own government. The goal is to pressure Canadian politicians to adopt 5 pledges:
1. Support reforms that increase government transparency and accountability. (?)
2. Make campaign promises specific and measurable, and report progress on promises and their metrics at least semi-annually.
3. Publish the content of his or her daily schedule, including meetings with lobbyists and special interest groups.
4. Support reforms allowing free access to scientific and survey data gathered by government institutions.
5. Support reforms that make it easier for Canadians to obtain government information they have a right to know.
A very well put together site and one that we'll be glad to reflect as time goes on. The real goal with the Change Congress effort is to share this idea and technology with everyone and let them use it as they wish in their own governments. So, Canada, you've got some new change-makers on the map.
Please join me in welcoming Stephanie Taylor to our Change Congress team. Stephanie's primary role will be to build the Change Congress netroots community and manage our online web presence.
She comes to Change Congress with many years of experience as an activist and organizer. She started as a field organizer for a number of years for SEIU 1199 in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, helping nurses and other health-care workers form unions and negotiate contracts. Later, she began working as an online organizing for the AFL-CIO, the DNC, MoveOn and most recently at SEIU, where she designed and implemented the first New Media Department in the history of the union.
Stephanie believes the Internet is making us a more democratic society, by shifting power away from moneyed elites into the hands of ordinary citizens. She feels that Change Congress is an important part of that movement, and is happy to be offering her skills towards its success.
Stephanie will be based in Washington, DC working closely with our Political Director Japhet Els and the rest of our Change Congress team based in San Francisco. No doubt, you will be hearing from Stephanie in the coming months -- we have plans to launch more campaigns designed to shine light on government corruption and put an end to the distorted ways Congress uses and views money.
Lessig's slideshow asking DSCC's Chuck Schumer and DCCC's Chris Van Hollen to follow Barack Obama and the DNC's refusal of lobbyist money is up on Youtube. Embed and send around as you wish.
UPDATE: The event has sold out. We are looking into streaming the presentation as a live podcast.
This Wednesday, August 13 Lawrence Lessig will address an audience at the Commonwealth Club in Silicon Valley. Click here for details and tickets.
In case you can’t make the speech, it will be broadcast on KQED Public Radio at a later date, stay tuned to the blog posts for details of that broadcast.
A coalition of government transparency groups (which Change Congress is a part of) is asking the Senate to take a step into the modern era by requiring that all campaign finance reports be filed electronically. Currently, these reports are filed on paper requiring massive amounts of information to be digitized and further delaying valuable info from the public's view. The House of Representatives has been filing electronically for years. Whats the holdup, Senators?
S. 223 was originally introduced by Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold over a year and half ago. Since then it's been blocked, stalled, or shut down by opponents like John Ensign (R-NV).
The Sunlight Foundation has put together a simple web page allowing you to see which Senators are supporting the bill, which are opposed, and how many calls each Senate office has received.
You can take a look at the actual bill over at OpenCongress and follow the supporters and opponents (including industry and activist groups) on Maplight.org.
Passing this bill will shine light into the dark corners of governmental process, and it starts with a couple of phone calls you can make. This should be a no-brainer, but, honestly, how often have you watched your government get no-brainers completely wrong?
Saturday was a busy one at Netroots Nation in Austin. After a high-energy morning starting with the anticipated Ask The Speaker event, followed by a surprise visit from Al Gore, Lawrence Lessig took the stage to dynamically discuss the ways in which money erodes trust. He gave examples from pharmaceutical issues to copyright law to environmental policy, showing how money is distorting the decisions our leaders are making. Check out the video:
For the last week we've received some interesting emails and comments from our members about Change Congress's stance on Obama's decision to opt out of public financing. Our basic response is one echoed by some' pundits and those working in the reform movement over the last two decades. It's a tough situation for any candidate to be in. The current public finance system is a mess and desperately needs to be overhauled.
Public financing is only one piece of the overall campaign reform puzzle, yet, a vital one. The recent dancing around public funding by McCain and Obama is a situation that no candidate should have to be in -- choosing between a broken system that could cost them the election while gaining positive press or being called a "flip flopper" for opting out of that same broken system.
The current public financing system fails to address major loopholes abused by both parties over the past twenty years. Until this needed reform happens, we're foolish to think that any candidates able to raise more on their own would ever opt-in to a broken system that could end up costing them a victory down the line.
The Big Loophole - the explosion of 527 groups over the past ten years has given rise to the nastiest negative campaigning we have seen in our time. On both sides of the aisle 527 groups have made it their raison d'etre to challenge and accuse candidates not in line with their political ideals, launching powerful, well-funded attacks that can single-handedly change the outcome of an election. While many of these groups do not (and indeed by law cannot) work with or coordinate with a campaign, they are often ideologically aligned with one candidate and are often staffed with members of the same political party
The Big Flaw - the $84 million that public financing offers is not enough to run a presidential campaign in this economy. The problem is not that there is too much money in politics, rather that there is too much of the wrong kind of money in politics -- money from lobbyists and PAC organizations, people who expect favors later on. If we want a public financing system to be legitimate we have to honestly address the shortfalls that this sum of money leaves in its wake; the cost of national advertising on television, radio and internet being a major one. Or the cost of employing a national grassroots staff working in every state in the country. The public financing offer from the government should be realistic compared with the costs of a presidential campaign. If we want candidates to buy into the system, make them a decent offer. They aren't going to accept a used Chevy Malibu when they can buy a new Ferrari with their own money.
Pundits on the right say Obama is a hypocrite, given his pledge to accept public funding earlier in the campaign and then recently deciding not to. Both candidates could be called as such. McCain gladly accepted public financing during the Republican primaries when he was losing and broke, and then petitioned the Federal Election Commission to opt back out when he was winning and wealthy (and now he's opting back IN). Neither are wrong, they are simply doing the expected political shifting based on our broken system.
I can't wait for the day when a well-crafted, mutually agreed-upon, public financing system is finally ready to be implemented. But that day will come only after enough of us stand up to change that system by making it possible for politicians who fight for issues like public financing to win office and take this change to Washington. Change Congress is about working with you and other organizations dedicated to reforming this system from the inside out. The current system isn't working for the people, so it must be changed by the people from the bottom up. You can help, be a part of our movement, help us re-build this broken system. Join us! Its only our government if we work to reclaim it.
I've known about Lawrence Lessig for a total of 2 months…so not so long compared to most of you. You might also say that I am new to this whole world…the blogging world and the world of technology. Given this is my second post ever.
Before I joined Change Congress (C-C), I was clear about how I wanted to spend the next decade of my life, I wanted to find someone with "BIG IDEAS" and help to make them happen. And like all of us, I wanted this next decade to define my "foot print" (not carbon) of contribution to this world. I think it is safe to say…I really had no idea what I was getting into.
Now that it's been a couple of months as the new Executive Director to Lawrence Lessig's new movement, I don't feel as shy to share my voice with the C-C community. And…to take a moment to brag about my new boss, because to me, he is new and he is taking on the boldest idea yet, reforming our Congress. I invite you to take a look at his latest speech given in Minneapolis at the National Conference on Media Reform.
Greetings to you, our Change Congress community. You’ve not heard my voice on our blog as of yet, I am the Executive Director for Change Congress and no doubt you will be hearing more from me. I have an invitation for all qualified candidates. Please read below and reply if you’re serious and you meet all specifications. We are located in downtown San Francisco.
Duties:
Drive people to the C-C web site and keep the community engaged in our process.
Find and implement the latest organizing technology and tools for the growing Change Congress community.
With use of cutting edge technology, empower our community to make the greatest impact for our cause.
Work with developers and political director to build new organizing technology to support the Change Congress community.
Present monthly updates to staff highlighting options for organizing technology we could utilize for future strategy building.
Proactive thinker and team player
Job Description:
Direct and design the technical framework for our website.
Blog on website and engage with community; keep the community excited about C-C work.
Anticipate and design new tools for community to use and engage in as necessary/needed.
Engage with other bloggers.
Work with technical team to ensure site is built and updated, and tools are being used.
Work in conjunction with Political Director to drive messages to community.
Requirements:
Software product management experience a plus.
History of political blogging experience a big plus.
Previously worked on successful technical project.
Please, only qualified serious candidates need apply. Submit your resume to admin@change-congress.org. Include 2-3 paragraphs in a cover letter along with your resume telling us why you feel you would be perfect for this position with this organization at this moment in time. Salary is commensurate based on experience. Please no phone calls.
We're excited to say that our first Change Congress candidate, Chellie Pingree won her democratic primary last night over Democrat Adam Cote and C-C's other committed candidate, Ethan Strimling. We were thrilled to have two C-C candidates vying for the seat and it's a real testament to the people of Maine's first congressional district and the type of change they want in Washington, D.C. that two C-C candidates were so well represented (well, Pingree a bit more than Strimling when all was said and done).
Both C-C candidates were outstanding and we thank them for participating in perhaps one of the toughest parts of an active democracy: running for elected office. Ethan Strimling ran an incredible campaign on a minuscule budget that depended upon everyday people engaging their neighbors and friends and spreading the word about their candidate. Chellie Pingree, former director of Common Cause and one-time candidate for U.S. Senate, has been actively engaged in working for change for decades in Maine. Thanks so much to both of them for a great race and we'll be watching Chellie as she takes on Republican Charles Summers in November.
Today, two C-C candidates are squaring off in Maine's First Congressional District. Ethan Striming and Chellie Pingree, both of whom signed the C-C pledge, are battling amongst other Democratic candidates for the open seat left by Rep. Tom Allen who is challenging Republican Susan Collins for governor.
CQ Politics has a brief writeup of the political landscape in Maine's first district and it looks as though the latest polls have favored Pingree in part because of her political history within the state. Strimling, for his part, committed to all four C-C pledges and has run an incredible campaign on a shoestring budget. Pingree, committed to all but the first C-C pledge.
I'm looking for early results before the polls close in Maine. If anyone has any results they'd like to post please do!
Change Congress' own Jim Cooper of Tennessee was interviewed on Nashville's Liberadio Show and talked about the earmark conundrum and the important issues that the Change Congress community is working on. Congressman Cooper took pledges two through four and was the first member of Congress to sign on.
Those of you in the Tennessee Fightin' Fifth (and anyone else that would like to) let Jim know that you support his effort to fully support public campaigns, reform the earmark process and stand up for transparency in our government.
I've given now four versions of the lecture launching Change Congress. You can see them all (and more) at the Change Congress channel at blip.tv [change-congress.blip.tv]. Some have asked for the resources to remix (by which I take it they mean, improve on) the message. I've very happily now made those resources available here.
On that page you'll find links to two directories, one related to the April 4 Harvard speech, and the other related to the April 11 UCSB speech. Each folder has a keynote file, a ppt file, an image for each slide, and a zip wrapping up all the images. The page will be fancied up soon enough. Everything is under a CC-BY license. Remix away.
In case you didn't have a chance to be in Boston two weeks ago, here is Lessig's Change Congress talk at Harvard. Congressman Jim Cooper (D-TN) joined Lessig at this address as well.
When I first heard about Change Congress, my immediate reaction was, "it's about time." As Lawrence Lessig pointed out in the powerpoint slide he used to introduce the organization, the issues that Change Congress tackles, even if they may not seem like the most important issues, are the first ones. Finally there was an organization that was going to allow for unprecedented interconnectedness between people who were concerned about the sorry state of this country's policy-making apparatus.
In that spirit, I started talking to somefriends about ways to help spread the word and create incentives for websites to promote Change Congress. What we came up with was Blogrolling for Change, the rules of which are explained here.
The idea is simple: Say you have a website or a blog. If you write a page or post with the Change Congress button and a couple paragraphs explaining why you support Change Congress, you can then email or post to us and we'll add it to our del.icio.us account and send you the HTML to add the del.icio.us links to your site. That way, each Change Congress post will show up on each website.
It's a relatively modest way of promoting Change Congress, but our hope as the websites signed on to Blogrolling for Change begin to support each other with increased traffic and people who didn't already know about Change Congress start to see that familiar button on more and more websites, the program will take on a life of its own. After all, this is an issue that a huge majority of Americans, liberal and conservative alike, should be able to agree on - the tricky part is just raising awareness of how important the problem is first.
If you would like to get your website on the Blogrolling for Change blogroll, don't hesitate to email me.
Ed Fallon is a Democrat, and candidate for Congress in Iowa's 3d congressional district. He is a Change Congress candidate (pledging 4 out of 4 planks), and I asked him to write a bit about why he has chosen not to accept money from lobbyists and PACs. Here's his post:
Throughout my political career, I have refused contributions from PACs and lobbyists. Since 1992, campaign finance reform has been the centerpiece of my political agenda. Nearly every other issue – including health care, the environment, and sustainable agriculture – is compromised by the presence of corporate money in politics. America needs what Maine, Arizona and Connecticut have at the state level: voluntary public financing of elections.
When I ran for Governor of Iowa in 2006, as a matter of principle I maintained my commitment to running a campaign free of big money. Pundits predicted I’d receive only 5% – 10% of the vote, but I finished a strong third with 26%. In fact, I won Iowa’s third congressional district, and now I’m running for Congress against a Democratic incumbent who has voted far too often with President Bush and against the priorities most Iowans value.
My opponent is Congressman Leonard Boswell, who in 2007 raised $722,327. Of that amount, 74% came from PACs, the vast majority from corporate PACs, including Wal-mart, AT&T, Boeing and various agribusiness interests.
Serving in the Iowa Legislature without PAC or lobbyist money allowed me to be a consistent, progressive voice for the public’s interest. If we are to take back our government and our country, we need to build a bluer Democratic Congress one seat at a time. My primary election is an opportunity to do that, and I welcome the support of reform-minded Americans in Iowa and beyond. For more information about my campaign and to make a donation, please visit FallonforCongress.com. Thanks!
So welcome to our blog. All posts on my blog related to Change Congress will be echoed here, and sometimes when something makes sense here only, I'll post it here only.
One promise: Everything posted under my name purporting to be from me will be written by me.
Hopefully, we've been reasonably good at returning email. What we're finding is that there is an immense amount of energy out there to achieve the goals that Change Congress stand for and its been an amazing week with Congressman Cooper's pledge as well as many other candidates running for Congress this election cycle. We'll be releasing these candidate's once we confirm their pledge support.
For now, please use this blog as a communication tool. We know its rather simple right now and as we get rolling we'll be adding more pieces to it, but it will serve the purpose of getting the conversation going at the moment. Also, we hope people will post their own updates on research, information and tidbits they're finding about their own members of Congress from their districts.
Thanks again and stay tuned for more as we pick up the pace.
