When I moved to Washington DC I did it for one purpose -- I wanted to understand the culture that made our elected leaders so responsive to corporate interests, and so deaf to the interests of their constituents.
From the outside, I didn't understand what the institutional pressures were that made it so easy, so consequence-free for Democrats and Republicans to open up the government coffers for looting by corporate America while people across the country were losing their jobs and couldn't afford to get basic healthcare.
The short answer: they know they will pay no price. Washington DC is a town that operates one one principle -- maintaining incumbency. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. It is the ultimate heresy to act in any way that might cost someone their seat. Hence almost everyone in the Senate flocked to Connecticut to help Joe Lieberman in his primary battle, despite the damage he consistently does to the party.
There is no higher orthodoxy in DC: thou shalt not challenge an incumbent.
Earlier this year, something happened that shocked members of Congress. The average person might not have heard much about it, and media covered it almost not at all, but believe me, it shook Democrats in the House to their core -- progressive groups got together and ran the uber-corporatist Al Wynn out of office.
The responding rage was seismic.
It happened by chance, however. A committed and high quality candidate came out of the right district who was smart, had great relationships in her community, and knew how to run a campaign -- Donna Edwards. She had the "right stuff", but she was also running in a district right next to DC and had a long career in which she had personal relationships with the pollsters and media buyers needed to make a strong electoral case.
It made sense for progressive groups including SEIU, Emily's List, MoveOn and others to come together and back her campaign. They knew and trusted her, and she knew and trusted them. Steve Rosenthal at Working For Us PAC coordinated their efforts (as well as advocacy around core progressive issues on the c4 side at They Work for Us) and ran a $1.5 million shadow campaign that resulted in an 18 point drubbing of Al Wynn.
We learned in 2006 how the very idea of a primary challenge could immediately change behavior. When blue dog Ellen Tauscher started complaining about the "liberal" committee chairmen who were going to be problematic, people on the blogs and in her community started talking about a primary challenge. Tauscher moved immediately to the left, joined the Out of Iraq caucus, and stopped having her picture taken with George Bush. Jane Harmon had a similar conversion after a tough primary race against Marcy Winograd.
Primary challenges work. The threat of a primary challenge in 2010 will change behavior in 2008. The question is -- how can we create a system where we aren't dependent on chance for a Donna Edwards (or Ned Lamont) to emerge?
Earlier this year, our Accountability Now PAC raised money for the purpose of holding our elected officials accountable. We have been working since then to try and figure out the best way to use that money, and ultimately decided that it could best be used trying to find more candidates like Donna Edwards.
So Accountability Now brought together partners including MoveOn, SEIU, They Work for Us, Color of Change, the Steelworkers, DailyKos and BlogPAC and are funding a project to look at districts across the country and try to figure out where we can find great candidates to challenge incumbents who have become more responsive to corporate America than they have to their constituents.
We're going to be working with They Work for Us (where Markos is on the board) and Steve Rosenthal in order to start this methodical search. Matt Stoller (whose great work on the Bush Dogs has consistently done so much to highlight what we're up against) will also be helping out.
You can hear more about it on Glenn Greenwald's Salon radio show, where Markos, Glenn and I discuss the 2010 Primary Project. The press release is here.
So please help us get started by telling us if you know great progressive leaders in your community who deserve support. Taking on incumbents is extremely difficult, and often times good challengers won't step forward because they don't think they can martial the resources required to be successful. We want to find these people, evaluate them and let them know that we are here and we can help them.
Let us know about great progressive leaders in your community here.
We also need your support. This is a long-term project, and we intend to build a program that will be a strong counterbalance to the corporate-friendly incumbency protection program that has left us all feeling so bereft of leadership representing our interests in Washington DC.
Help us take back Washington by donating to the Primary Project here.
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight



Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search


Thanks, Jane. Is the focus right now only on progressive primary challengers to underperforming Democratic incumbents, or do you also want progressive candidates for offices now in Republican hands?
Great Jane,
wonderful!
Jane, this is great!
I have supported the Sierra Club Political Committee for years. Their operating principles are to support candidates who are good on the environment, who they deem are in a winnable race and who really need the help. They try to get the most bang for their buck. Perhaps you could join forces with them and also learn what it is that they’ve done that works and what doesn’t.
1,788 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
Great post, you are the real deal there Sister Jane, now I know why I made my two daughters watch the reruns of “Wonderwoman”. I don’t have a name to advance in my district though there are several that would really do the job if they could be intised out of their comfortable law practices but I would like to encourage you and the other movers and shakers in Accountability Now to look at Representative Ron Kind and his close personal relationship to the banks and credit card bosses…this is one Blue Dog that needs a paint job.
sorry for the OT drive by… but chores await
Tax Profs Agree: Gov. Palin’s Tax Returns Are Wrong
Jack Bogdanski (Lewis & Clark) & Bryan Camp (Texas Tech) have independently reviewed the tax issues raised by the release of Gov. Palin’s 2006 and 2007 tax returns and financial disclosure form, as well as the remarkable opinion letter issued from Washington D.C. tax lawyer Roger M. Olsen. Jack and Bryan conclude that there are serious errors in Gov. Palin’s returns as filed and that she and her husband owe tens of thousands of dollars in additional taxes.
Jack Bogdanski, There’s No Debate: Palins Owe Thousands in Back Taxes:
why does SARE-RAH hate MERIKA?
We’re going to try to work with everyone, including the environmental groups, to put good people in office. First task is identifying them, so we can bring them to everyone’s attention.
Norske is right — the Blue Dogs need a paint job.
Rick Noriega(D) running for Senate in Texas against never-ever-voted-for-the-people Cornyn(R).
running for the U.S. Senate, in case that wasn’t clear.
Hi Jane. One way to hammer at the incumbency protection racket is to highlight those who vote against their constituents’ interests and point to possible challengers. I think calling them out by name like that can be effective if sustained.
I’m makin’ a list:
1. Steny Hoyer - for all the damage he’s done. (I wish I lived in Maryland and had hit the lotto - I’d self-fund and do it myself for the sheer pleasure of watching him spend bales of his corporate friends’ cash and still lose.)
2. Rahm Emanuel - for that IL-06 debacle ($6 mil, it cost), for elbowing his way to the front to claim credit for the electoral victories in 2006, for “free trade”, for all the chicaneries which bear his aroma if not fingerprints.
3. Pick a Blue Dog…. not even the worst of them - if you’ll primary someone in the middle of that pack, it leaves the Rethug-lites on the farther wing wondering what will happen to them.
4. Pick a timorous “Dem” who shakes like the leaves on an aspen at the thought of Republicans calling them nasty names.
5. Pick someone who voted for the MCA.
6. Pick someone who voted for the “New FISA” or the so-called PAA.
Debbie Cook (D) Orange County, vs Rorabacer (R)
This is a great project. While we may not want to see it just yet but are you planning on coming up with a list of particularly targeted seats?
Sigh. My hope is that a lot of the Repiglicans stay home and energized Obama voters come out and give down-ballot candidates victories. If Box Turtle wins Texas will be without representation in the senate for years, as the Dems will hold power after Nove. 4.
how ’bout Rahm, Hoyer, Pelosi ?
oops
how ’bout Rahm, Hoyer, Pelosi ?
Ken Salazar should be at the top of everyone’s list for removal in a 2010 primary because his voting record is abysmal. He may have a (D) after his name but he sure does vote like a conservative republican.
I think I would add Debbie Wasserman Schultz
There are AIG hearings on C-Span. Those AIG guys know how to party with the taxpayers money. Congress kritter Elijah Cummings notes the following expenses: Hotel rooms $200k, banquets $150k, spa $23k, salons $14k, leisure dining $10k.
Even the freepers are whining.
Thanks Jane.
digg
“Primary challenges work.” More than one blue dog turned legitimately blue due to pressure frm the center and the left…
Iowa’s Boswell finally performed a bona-fide blue streak when he had to face a challenge from Ed Fallon from the left.
So even when those challenges don’t result in a changing of the guard, the guard itself is forced to change from within just to protect their incumbent arses.
my jaw dropped wide-open, and the NY Insurance Commissioner thinks it’s OK onaccounta gotta keep those elite
wankersworkers happy.Good Grief!
This project sounds great Jane! I can’t wait for the day when all elected officials are held accountable to the people who elect them and not to the corporations and Big Money men of this country!
Hey Pups Digg is open and this Post surely needs Digging and Spotlighting!
It’s going to be easy to identify the ones we need to get rid of - the hard part is finding really good challengers for them. I still would like so much to get rid of Steny. I was also reading this morning that Chambliss is really threatened this time - WOW. That would be a real “get”.
Excellent list.
Citizen Elliot:
Even though Howie Klein doesn’t think it’s doable, I think Rahm’s racist stand on immigration and his ignorin’ the substantial latino population in his district makes ‘im vulnerable to a Latino primary challenger. And Nancy Pelosi is standin all alone in San Fransisco, I don’t think Sasalito and the north Bay could keep ‘er in office if the City of San Fransisco ken run a real candidate…how ’bout a gay lawayer with ties ta Bolt Hall? I think Pelosi is toast and she knows it.
Stenny is too corrupt ta beat unless an Obama justice department ken pull a Rostenkowski on the bastard.
Thanks Jane. I kicked in another $25.
i have a question about how the money is going to be used:
will it ever be used to protect incumbents or will it be used solely to challenge incumbents?
my jaw dropped wide-open, and the NY Insurance Commissioner thinks it’s OK onaccounta gotta keep those elite wankers workers happy.
Don’t other companies have weekend “retreats”?
Like, out in the woods?
This is fantastic!
I would certainly like to see Evan Bayh at the top of the list for being unseated –he’s such a tool of Republicans.
“the hard part is finding really good challengers for them.”
No simple chore, most of those who qualify are too honorable to
sell used carsrun for office, politics is just too dirty for many of the good leaders, and they keep their leadership in the private sector.Take a lesson from the past; bone up on Robert Norlan’s “Political Prairie Fire”, a concise look at the non-partisan league political movement from 1915 to 1922..
Finding honorable citizens to step into a corrupt, dysfunctional and dishonorable political milieu has been accomplished in the past, but it was not easy. According to Norlan, it was the hardest part of the process, but once the new leadership was defined and identified, they stepped in and changed everything, in short order.
Definitely worth the read, if you are looking for some sort of reference or precedent on this issue.
Everyone should click on Frank’s link for the pictures.
I stayed at that resort a few years ago on an insurance companies dime.
An unbelievable place!
And totally inappropriate given the bailout they were just handed. Absolutely no excuse.
I asked about the cost of staying an extra couple days when the meeeting was over and was told our accommodations were $690 per night.
We promptly checked out and headed to the airport.
Citizen foothillsmike:
I think “L’il Debbie” Wasserman Schult got a scare earlier in this campaign when she was called out on her enabling the Cuban mafia in contiguous districts…remember that she’s got a district of retired, Northeast coast Jewish folks and I think she assumed they wouldn’t give her any flak for supportin “safe”brown folks. I think if we ken make a run at Rahm, L’il Debbie will fall inta line.
another question:
accountability now pac was, i thought, part of the strangebedfellows project which included non-D partners. the list above looks more like a list of D groups. has the party affiliation of the project changed, and if so how?
Thanks again Jane for all you do.
Will send cash to support this much needed project as soon as I can.
In addition to targeting heretofore unaccountable incumbents, we need to destroy gerrymandering–for left or right–to create “safe” seats.
The angry, self-righteous rhetoric of the right thrives in these safe havens.
The irresponsibility of the timid Dems is abetted by them.
Do ya think that there is a politician in Indiana with more’n 3 brain cellz left that could give this empty suit a run?
Speaking of “Progressive Campaigns” This just came in my email:
Jane,
Wouldn’t it make as much sense to focus on replacing those that move up-ballot with as good or better candidates in the making? Are all politics really local? Yes, it would be a long term project but how else to keep the pipeline loaded?. (Just thinkin out loud.)
JEP,
You have an advantage in Iowa, in that your district maps are drawn by a nonpartisan commission. Your Congressional races tend to be more competitive than is the norm.
Would that we had that here in NM and everywhere else. Safe districts are also part of the problem. New Mexico was packed to make the 1st District sort-of competitive (that’s Albuquerque), the 2nd District safe R and the 3rd District safe D.
BC
gerrymandering is a scandal, districts should be set up by non-partisan means
Jane - we need to find someone for NY-24. Mike Arcuri is a huge disappointment - he voted FOR FISA and FOR the bailout. He’s running against a GOP named Mark Hanna this fall, but if he comes out of this, we need to find a good, solid progressive. The big issue really is that NY-24 is a huge district - all over the place - and it requires someone who ‘knows the territory’ (as they say in the Music Man) in terms of agriculture, industrial development etc.
Lurk can you fix the Digg?? Looks like I have double Dugg it!! Along with BooRadley (:>)) Sorry Boo but I guess it just goes to show you we support the Lake and our great Posters!!
Good Morning Jane and Firedogs,
frankly, there are plenty of whip-smart, committed progressive types right here at the Lake - nudge, nudge, wink, wink
as to who to take out - have always thought not to bother with all of the Bush Dogs, simply take out their leaders and scare the electoral crap out of the remaining cowards
same for Senate - target Reid, Schumer, Pelosi - that’s a lot of money but taking those 3 out would do more to undo that always fresh, tingly, aristocratic feeling :D
1. Gotta start somewhere.
2. When doing something, if one has an objective, it goes much more easily than maundering around. As far as I’m concerned, Steny drew a nice big “Primary me” sign on his fat behind with the FISA self-neutering. No mercy or sympathy from my corner after that.
Keep in mind, some of these future candidates we are seeking aren’t running YET. If you know someone who would make a good leader, but they don’t want to get caught up in the intrinsic intrigue and hoopla, keep after them.
One of the best ways to change the circus act we call electin season is to elect intelligent, reasonable people to office who aren;t driven by their own desperation to do anything to win.
It’s a chicken-egg conundrum; stop electing so many sleazebags(R) to office and the whole game will shape up. Sleazebags hire sleazier-bags (McCain=Schmidt) so by changing the type of candidate we are willing to support, we change the nature of the contest to reflect the civilized democracy we imagine we are part of, rather than the dog-eat-dog political jungle we now suffer.
That’s something I have been thinking a lot about lately - how do we ‘grow our own’? What’s the ladder for people? We need good folks at every level, from highway supervisor on up -
I would suggest looking the (much derided) community organizers. These are people that already have the common man’s interests at heart.
Meant to include this:
3. Robocalls are cheap. And one can start with robocalls immediately upon the end of this campaign.
“Call Steny and ask him why he sold you out to the NSA”, “Steny Hoyer is the Banker’s best friend” or similar stuff. To soften him up in his own district. Likely (and I’m not sure on the legalities), you don’t even need a primary challenger selected to start softening up an incumbent with exposing his record to the constituents.
No problem. It looks like we both dugg it simultaneously.
more questions….
what does it mean that donna edwards voted for the wall street bailout? that, i thought, was the most disappointing vote of the week. i spent a lot of time on the phone yesterday with someone in her office and could get no explanation re why she thought it would help more than hurt.
Gerry-meandering is one of the worst offenses that helps identifiy the creeps in retrospect (Most Texas Districts, and California’s 3rd District are good examples of this extreme demographic manipulation).
Unfortunately, I would hope the Democrats will do the same when they have some of these statehouses under control, from the other side of the aisle, if only to balance the power back to a more representative model.
But as long as we are mired in a two-party system, this problem will always teeter-totter back and forth between the two.
final question:
speaking of accountability, how will donors be informed about how much $ is raised, how it is spent, as well as how decisions decisions are made and what decisions are made? basically, how transparent will the operation be?
thanks much - very exciting developments.
Look in the mirror first, and decide if you can be one of these new leaders.
Once you are certain you can’t, then go looking for someone else.
But don’t think for a moment that any one CAN’T do this, the fact is, and we have proof of it every day lately, ANYONE can run for office.
So consider yourself first, then go from there.
$25 for Accountability Now
Looks that way to me Boo. Like I said it just shows we Support the Lake and All it stands for.
I do like the thought of banning all corporate money from elections and strictly limiting how much each individual can donate to a candidate and an overall limit on political donations by an individual. That would sure change the landscape of politics in this country!!
Can I, once again, nominate Marcy for ANYTHING? Not that Jane and Christy wouldn’t be good, too, but Marcy’s got that rugby edge, she’s a natural born candidate. And apparently the “F” word is no stranger to Congressional chambers, so that’s no big issue, Marcy will fit right in..
I think we (the blogs) could all get behind her campaign as a great example of just how powerful the blogs can be… Obama’s managed to break all fundraising records using the toobz, lets use this tool and foist our own candidate up on our own petard (The New Non-Partisan League?) and send a resounding ripple through the two-party system.
She voted against it the first time.
If you’ll recall no less a liberal than Paul Krugman supported Edwards’ second vote. We had to do something.
You’re a FISA expert, what other Dems publicly criticized Obama on his FISA position?
Do you want to hand the seat back to Steny’s boy, Al Wynn?
gotta go, but anyone who thinks I’m snarkin’ is mistaken.
on my way out the door
Breaking - MSNBC - SCOTUS: Release SOME Gitmo detainees
mad, progressive love to all
Have A FDL day !!!
I think we need to look at this bundling thing too
Wow Jane! This cheers me up big big time. Future looking brighter. This kind of thing will eventually clear the ‘you betchas’ out of Alaska too and also.
Sending money, yes, best investment ever, especially for the children, for the climate, for the energy yes yes.
There is a part of me that wants D’s controlling the State Lege’s to redraw hyperpartisan maps in 2011.
But I know that’s very bad for our polity. I want districting taken away from the Lege, and handed to nonpartisan commissions who are instructed to prioritize compact districts, and keeping natural political units together. It’s a tough problem, but allowing politicians to select their constituencies has been proven to be a worse problem.
BC
This is definitely what is needed. Enough of the Blue Dogs and corporatist Dems.
good point
If liberals are going to pull their support based on one vote, we’re never going to gain any political traction on our core issues. We’ll drive liberal candidates back into the waiting arms of Steny Hoyer and the rest of the Vichy Dems.
the one thing about being a politician is that no one is ever happy with your vote
I would consider that to be completely banned! You you would have to donate directly to the campaign of your choice. Oh and here is another thought Ban all these 527’s so we can get all the filth out of campaigning!
Thanks, back at you and Mr. cbl.
many progressive need to hear what your saying
Getting rid of the 527’s would get a lot of the filth out but were not going to get allof the filth out until candidates like McShame/Palin are not nominated
“allowing politicians to select their constituencies has been proven to be a worse problem.”
And one of the most powerful tools of corporate influence.
Think 1994…
Marcy’s on it already: “The Problem Isn’t So Much that She’s a Tax Cheat . . .“
Be careful what you are asking for. Do you want to ban Blue America and Act Blue?
Not yet, but in the future such campaigns will not be need as all candidates will know they will have to answer to those who elect them and NOT special interests and corporations. This would in fact make this a more representative government of the people’s will. You could also make Voting mandatory for all citizens as Australia does now! While we are at it all lobbyists should be banned from witting ANT new bills for congressional consideration. Besides there are more Democrats than Republicans registered in this country!
so your answer is that edwards did the right thing by voting for the wall street bailout on friday? just trying to understand. thanks.
Jane Hamsher has BloggingHeadsTV upstairs (this is going to be good)
Me vs. Jerome Corsi
I want to add my support of what BooRadley is saying. If you find a person like Donna Edwards, you have to support ability to do the right thing.
We all know how powerful Mob Mentality is. We wouldn’t want to be like the town folk who listen to a minister and run one of our own out on a rail because God told the minister she was a witch, would we?
It’s fairly easy to sit at home and read a few articles and then jump up and down when someone else’s (many times more informed) voting record isn’t exactly how one we vote.
There’s a lot wrong with our government, but there are some things that work. Let’s continue to make it so.
i’m curious to know what jane’s take is.
personally, i’m fine with candidates i support talking lots of votes i don’t like. but i do have a few lines that, for me, define acceptability. i understand that those lines will be different for different people - i have no problem with that. but are you advocating that we should have no line?
and that is why i called her office - to find out what her thinking was. i found no evidence that she was more informed than people here. that i found scarey and i hope is not true. still, i’d like some evidence of that.
if accountability is to mean anything, doesn’t it apply to our allies as well as our opponents? or do we have our own version of It’s OK if You Are One of Us?
No, we’re working with the Ron Paul folks on a similar project for Republicans.
If the idea is to remove the influence of corporate funding, then it stands to reason that the candidates Accountability Now will back would need to support public financing of elections. Is that part of the plan?
brilliant!
thank you very much for the reply. much appreciated, and i’m very excited about your work on this. many, many thanks. i don’t have much $ to donate, but if there is something i could do to help (and i’m not proud, the equivalent of sweeping floors is ok) please let me know.
agreed
The devil is in the details. Congress can still bring a lot of sunlight to how Paulson spends the $700 billion. Another issue, per Ian, is all the money the FED is lending.
Since we’re in EPU land, I’m turning it around on you. Who are the reps in the House in your opinion who are more in sinc with liberal policies than Donna Edwards?
I don’t think that is what she was saying. Donna was eviscerated after her second vote. No candidate no matter how progressive is going to vote the way we want 100% of the time because we all can’t agree on EVERYTHING 100% of the time.
we disagree about the bailout then.
my question had nothing to do with comparing edwards to anyone else. its was about her vote on friday - that is all.
of course not. i’ve already said i agree with that.
the question i have is: are there any lines that if crossed, you would withdraw your support over? choice for example is something i would expect jane to withdraw support over (in fact i would be disappointed if she did not).
if we agree that there are lines, then we can argue (in a friendly way of course *g*) over what those lines ought to be.
but it seems to me that the argument being made is that we shouldn’t have lines - that is what i’m trying to confirm, if true.
p.s. gotta run now - maybe we can continue the conversation, if you like, at a later point.
This isn’t about individual votes — Donna was used as an example of how progressives orgs can join together and help someone get elected, nothing more.
that seems to be the argument you are taking away fro the comments but that is not the one that I am offering or that I understood to be made. you hold them accountable but there were progressive who wanted the bailout and to ignore that fact is disingenuous. that being said, progressive don’t agree on every issue 100% so while one criticizes for a vote, another praises it but no matter the side, we can’t villainize a progressive as a whole for one vote
Great idea! I just nominated and contributed.
To make this work, the groups, bodies, organisations will have to reach consensus on a few critical issues….Global warming, FISA, corporate welfare, Iraq….. pick the top 5 to 7 and let the rest be undefined. The more issues, the less chance of consensus.
Regarding criticism of Reps voting for the bailout…..the massive main street, small business lobbying was impossible to resist on the final “rescue bill”. Sad, but that IS our culture. We have become voracious credit consumers, and changing that culture is going to be tough.
I echo selise at 52…..when/how do we know how money is spent, what criteria, strategy? I know we can do it if we get it right. so let’s do it.
Wib
It sounds as though you understand the meltdown better than I do. What was your solution and how were you planning on getting it past a Bush veto before the economy cratered?
Also, what are you current plans encourage Congress to provide adequate oversight of the $700 billion given to Treasury/Paulson?
Very late to the party, am assuming someone will read the thread after everyone moves upstairs. I want Joe Donnelly (IN-2) OUT, along with Bayh.
Wait wouldn’t that make the guy a colleague of a “terrorist” (John Yoo)?
Actually that should have been
“Wait wouldn’t that make the guy a “colleague” of a “terrorist” (John Yoo)?”