Is The Democratic Party Worth Reforming And Saving? Are We Stuck With It As Our Only Hedge Against Fascism?

Even before Biden showed how incoherent and unfit he is during yesterday's debate, Michael Hudson, University of Missouri in Kansas City economics professor and author of And forgive them their debts: Lending, Foreclosure and Redemption from Bronze Age Finance to the Jubilee Year, published a call to abolish the DNC and break up the Democratic Party. He wrote that the debate-- "a reality entertainment show"-- would be a "shameless charade" and that despite the pretense that we're selecting who the Democratic nominee will be, most Americans "vote with their backsides, belonging to the informal but dominant party of non-voters who choose not to be sucked into legitimizing the bad choices put before them."

Hudson wrote that "Most Americans are now living from paycheck to paycheck and cannot come up with even $400 in an emergency. They are afraid to go on strike or even to complain about their job, because they are afraid of getting fired-- and of losing their corporate health care, knowing that getting sick may wipe them out... Voters basically want what Bernie Sanders is promising: a basic right to Single Payer health care and a retirement income. That means protection against the Republican-Democratic threats to cut back Social Security to balance the budget in the face of tax cuts for the richest One Percent and rising Cold War military spending. This means a government strong enough to take on the vested financial and corporate interests and prosecute Wall Street’s financial crime and corporate monopoly power. When neoliberals shout, 'But that’s socialism,' Americans finally are beginning to say, 'Then give us socialism.' It beats being ground down into debt peonage."

[H]ere’s the trick that the TV debates sweep under the rug: It is not the voters who are empowered to choose the Democratic Party’s candidate. That privilege belongs legally to the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Since stacking the political deck in 2016 to serve up Hillary Clinton as nominee, it has put in place rules that will enable its Donor Class members, super-delegates and other lobbyists for the One Percent to repeat the trickery once again in 2020.

I hope that the candidate who is clearly the voters’ choice, Bernie Sanders, may end up as the party’s nominee. If he is, I’m sure he’ll beat Donald Trump handily, as he would have done four years ago. But I fear that the DNC’s Donor Class will push Joe Biden, Kamala Harris or even Pete Buttigieg down the throats of voters. Just as when they backed Hillary the last time around, they hope that their anointed neoliberal will be viewed as the lesser evil for a program little different from that of the Republicans.

So Thursday’s reality TV run-off is about “who’s the least evil?” An honest reality show’s questions would focus on “What are you against?” That would attract a real audience, because people are much clearer about what they’re against: the vested interests, Wall Street, the drug companies and other monopolies, the banks, landlords, corporate raiders and private-equity asset strippers. But none of this is to be permitted on the magic island of authorized candidates...

The problem facing the Democratic National Committee today remains the same as in 2016: How to block even a moderately left-wing social democrat by picking a candidate guaranteed to lose to Trump, so as to continue the policies that serve banks, the financial markets and military spending for Cold War 2.0.

DNC donors favor Joe Biden, long-time senator from the credit-card and corporate-shell state of Delaware, and opportunistic California prosecutor Kamala Harris, with a hopey-changey grab bag alternative in smooth-talking small-town Rorschach blot candidate Pete Buttigieg. These easy victims are presented as “electable” in full knowledge that they will fail against Trump.

Trump meanwhile has done most everything the Democratic Donor Class wants: He has cut taxes on the wealthy, cut social spending for the population at large, backed Quantitative Easing to inflate the stock and bond markets, and pursued Cold War 2.0. Best of all, his abrasive style has enabled Democrats to blame the Republicans for the giveaway to the rich, as if they would have followed a different policy.





The Democratic Party’s role is to protect Republicans from attack from the left, steadily following the Republican march rightward. Claiming that this is at least in the direction of being “centrist,” the Democrats present themselves as the lesser evil (which is still evil, of course), simply as pragmatic in not letting hopes for “the perfect” (meaning moderate social democracy) block the spirit of compromise with what is attainable, “getting things done” by cooperating across the aisle and winning Republican support. That is what Joe Biden promises.

The effect has been to make America into a one-party state. Republicans act as the most blatant lobbyists for the Donor Class. But people can vote for a representative of the One Percent and the military-industrial complex in either the Republican or Democratic column. That is why most Americans owe allegiance to no party.

...The DNC preferred to lose with Hillary than win with Bernie, whom springtime polls showed would be the easy winner over Trump. Potential voters who didn’t buy into the program either stayed home or voted Green.

Now is the time to start thinking about what to do if and when the DNC presents voters with neoliberal Hillary 2.0, preferring to lose with Biden or his clones than to win with Bernie.

I think the only effective response will be to boycott the Democratic Party-- not only its presidential candidates, but its Blue Dog candidates and incumbents.

The legal kerfuffle raised by Sanders supporters in the aftermath made the switcheroo official. The courts affirmed that the Democratic Party’s candidate for president is legally chosen by the DNC alone, and may or may not be the candidate elected by voters in the primaries. To cap matters, the superdelegates serve as a safety valve against any candidate unwilling to go whole-hog neoliberal. A legal tangle of state and national U.S. election laws effectively blocks third parties from meaningful representation in Congress. Registered Independents such as Sanders are constrained to caucus with and serve on committees of one of the two parties.

That makes it difficult for any third party to play more than the role of a spoiler in elections. When the Democratic Party runs its right-wing Blue Dog candidates, a third-party protest will throw the Senate or Congressional election to the Republican-- until the DNC finally just walks away.

It would not help much to take over the Democratic Party as long as its rules cede control to Wall Street donors. For the party to be reconstituted, the coterie that has imposed Rubinomics, Hillary’s neocon military empire, and is threatening to balance the budget by cutting Social Security needs to be isolated.

The most obvious start is to run real progressive candidates against incumbents, like AOC in Queens. If the DNC bans consultants from working with them, they should be attacked in the primary and then either stay home or vote for a third party in the fall election to defeat the incumbent rather than participate in the fake choices of just which neoliberal may be the least worst.

Democrat leaders will denounce the Third Party, claiming that voters would have supported Democratic otherwise, much as they blamed Ralph Nader in 2000. The reality is that voters refused to support the right-wing neocon Joe Lieberman (how appropriate that he became Obama’s Senate mentor) and his neoliberal Democratic Leadership Council front-man Gore, who would have given George W. Bush a run for awfulness.

The only way to make the Democrat Party democratic is to clean house, to boycott its Blue Dog candidates even though this throws elections to the Republicans until the DNC is emptied out. Only at that point can its rules be replaced with ones committing the party to follow the choice of voters and the majority non-Democratic (even non-voting) bloc instead of big donors and super-delegates.

This tactic may lead to Republican sweeps in the next few elections. That is the price that the Democrats have forced to be paid for their neoliberal intransigence that has made Donald Trump their president as much as that of Republican voters.

There is no “middle class” policy in an indebted economy polarizing at an accelerating pace as financial rentiers lord it over an indebted majority. That is why wage earners have lost their identity with the Democratic Party’s loyalty to Wall Street. Although Democratic politicians presents themselves as the only alternative to Republican corporate lobbyists, the DNC is a smoke-filled room of donors, packaged in identity politics-- every identity except that of indebted wage earners. It is merely a diversion to focus on personalities and to claim that economic reform is “divisive” because it may offend centrist voters such as the Democrats’ dream of attracting suburban Republican women.

Joe Biden’s promise of a moderate centrist policy is like Warren Harding’s slogan of a “return to normalcy” a century ago, in 1920. But a “return” would mean rolling back the enormous post-1980 increase in debt, the privatizations, deregulation and other neoliberal nightmares. Today’s U.S. economy-- like that of Europe-- has no middle ground. Attempts at a “moderate” party are merely a euphemism for backing the financial and real estate sector, the oil industry and the military-industrial complex.

If America had a parliamentary system reflecting voters’ preferences for parties, the Democratic Party would share the fate of German and other European Social Democrats that have embraced neoliberal economics and would poll about 5 percent of the vote, just barely being represented in a truly democratic congress. Voters are rejecting neoliberalism everywhere, but the DNC and foreign formerly left-wing party bureaucracies are holding onto it. They have become zombie party hacks.

Sanders rightly blames Wall Street and the One Percent for the economy’s financial mess. Warren strikes a resonant chord in seeing the need to alleviate the debt burden saying in effect, “It’s the debt, stupid.” But she also seems prepared to go along opportunistically with the rest of the Democratic Party’s platform. Even so, the DNC seems quite willing to throw the election to Trump as its major funders and super-delegates back Biden, Harris and Buttigieg.

When Bernie says he will take on Wall Street, people believe him. When Elizabeth Warren says that, voters worry about just how far she may compromise. When Biden or Harris say that, most voters realize that they are simply grabbing slogans that play well in focus groups, selling their personalities without policy content.

Most potential voters have no party in the United States, but are forced into a choice between Republican and Democratic neoliberals. The polls euphemize most voters as “undecideds,” as if they have not decided to avoid both parties and try to scrape by as best they can with the bad choices put before them: Republican corporate lobbyists, or Democratic Wall Street lobbyists, both parties supporting military spending and representing the One Percent who form their donor base.

Most Democratic voters have decided not to back Biden or Harris. They realize their interests were betrayed first by Clintonomics and its deregulation of Wall Street and stripping away of social spending, and then by Obama protecting his Wall Street donors from “the mob with pitchforks,” namely, those who voted for his empty promise of hope and change. That is how the DNC views its constituency-- to be manipulated and its attention diverted onto the Fantasy Island episode aired on Thursday on ABC.

The Far Right Has Plans To Kill The Progressive Movement By Neutering The Union Movement

Just as we prepare for the Labor Day weekend, Guardian reporter Ed Pilkington exposes a plot by a right-wing alliance to "defund and defang" the American union movement. That's hardly new but after years of whittling down the union movement, the conservatives see an opportunity for a knock out blow. The methods have been successfully tested in several states, including former labor bastions like Wisconsin. "Rightwing activists across the US have launched a nationwide campaign to undermine progressive politicians by depriving them of a major source of support and funding-- public sector unions," wrote Pilkington. "A network of conservative thinktanks with outposts in all 50 states has embarked on a 'breakthrough' campaign designed to strike a 'mortal blow' against the American left. The aim is to 'defund and defang' unions representing government employees as the first step towards ensuring the permanent collapse of progressive politics. The campaign carries a powerful echo of the populist creed espoused by Donald Trump. The president was propelled into the White House last November after unexpected victories in several previously Democratic rust belt states including Michigan and Wisconsin, both of which have endured withering attacks on trade unions in recent years."

The new assault is being spearheaded by the State Policy Network (SPN), an alliance of 66 state-based thinktanks, or “ideas factories” as it calls them, with a combined annual budget of $80m. As suggested by its slogan-- “State solutions. National impact”-- the group outlines an aim to construct a rightwing hegemony throughout the US, working from the bottom up.

To do that, it first has to sweep aside the public sector unions and their historic ties to Democratic and progressive politicians. In a 10-page fundraising letter, part of a set of documents obtained by the Center for Media and Democracy and published by the Guardian today for the first time, SPN sets out its mission in frank language that does not disguise its partisan ambitions.

The author of the letter, SPN’s president and CEO Tracie Sharp,describes the $8m “breakthrough” campaign as a “once-in-a-lifetime chance to reverse the failed policies of the American left … We are primed, right now, to deliver the mortal blow to permanently break its stranglehold on our society.”

Sharp pitches the battle against unions as the start of a war on progressive politics, with the ultimate goal of winning elections for rightwing candidates. “Big government unions are the biggest sources of funding and political muscle for the left-- and a major obstacle to the ability of voters to reclaim control of American government. To win the battle for freedom, we must take the fight to the unions, state by state.”

The target of such union-bashing, she openly admits, is to “defund and defang one of our freedom movement’s most powerful opponents, the government unions.” The long-term objective is to “deal a major blow to the left’s ability to control government at the state and national levels. I’m talking about permanently depriving the left from access to millions of dollars in dues extracted from unwilling union members every election cycle” (emphasis in original).

SPN will be discussing its anti-union and anti-left agenda on Wednesday at its annual meeting in San Antonio, Texas. Its morning session will look at how “labor reform” can be pursued with renewed vigor under the Trump administration.

The discussion will feature some of the key architects of SPN’s political strategy, including Vincent Vernuccio who pioneered anti-union legislation in Michigan, and Tom McCabe of the Freedom Foundation, who has sent his foot soldiers on an aggressive offensive against collective bargaining in the US north-west.

Mary Bottari, deputy director of the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) which tracks the rise of rightwing groups in America, said the fundraising letter and other SPN documents published by the Guardian cast light on the conservative game plan. “It’s very rare to catch conservative thinktanks talking so openly and blatantly about their long-term political aims. These documents reveal to us that SPN’s goals are entirely political-- they have no concern for workers or union members, their only goal is winning elections to advance rightwing causes.”

Bottari added: “An $80m campaign to ‘defund and defang’ public sector unions is remarkable, both in its size and in its ambition.”

Public sector unions have come under growing fire from conservatives in recent years. While unions operating in private companies have been diminished since the 1980s-- their membership plummeting from about 17% of the workforce in 1983 to just 6% today-- their equivalents in the public sector such as teacher, local government, police and fire officer unions have remained relatively stable, at around 35%.

But in 2010, Scott Walker, the newly elected governor of Wisconsin, opened a new front in America’s partisan war when he passed Act 10, stripping public sector unions of the power to bargain collectively and forcing them to re-certify themselves every year with electoral backing from more than 50% of all workers, not just those voting. The move has spawned a rash of imitations across Republican-controlled states, with Iowa and Indiana passing similar laws, and a further 15 states introducing legislation-- encouraged by SPN, which has framed a model bill to make it easier for Republican legislators to adopt the changes.

A total of 28 states have also passed “right to work” laws that allow workers in private companies to refuse to join unions despite enjoying the fruits of collective bargaining.

Though the long-term consequences of such union restrictions have yet to be fully understood, there are early indications that the impact could be profound even at presidential level. Since Act 10 came into effect in Wisconsin, public sector union membership has slumped by 40%, or about 136,000 people.

Trump won Wisconsin last November by just 23,000 votes.

A similar pattern can be seen in Michigan where unions have shrunk steadily since a right-to-work law came into effect in 2013, with a loss of at least 30,000 members. Trump took Michigan, to the shock of Hillary Clinton and her supporters, by just 11,000 votes.

When asked whether anti-union laws in Michigan and Wisconsin had affected the outcome of the presidential race, Matt Patterson of the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform said: “No question in my mind. Hard to fight when your bazooka’s been replaced by a squirt gun.”

Carrie Conko, SPN’s vice president of communications, said that the network does not involve itself in political campaigns. “Labor reform is an issue where SPN has been clearly on the side of workers who are against forced unionization and the use of their hard-earned wages to support causes they don’t believe in. If workers choose to support their unions agenda that is fine-- but, right now, in many states they don’t have a choice or a voice.”

Conko’s statement echoed the language used in an SPN “toolkit”, also published here for the first time, that advises Republican policymakers on how to campaign for anti-union legislation. “Be pro-worker, not anti-union,” the pamphlet says. “Frame union reform from the point of view of the members and how the reform helps them have a greater voice in their union. Don’t rant against unions. We’ve all been frustrated by the actions of public sector unions to block pro-freedom reforms, but publicly venting these feelings is counterproductive.”

SPN’s disclosure of its political and partisan objectives in the new documents could arouse the interest of investigators from the Internal Revenue Service. The group is constituted as a 501(c)(3) organisation, which renders it exempt as a charity from taxation.

Marc Owens, a partner with Loeb & Loeb who worked as an IRS lawyer specializing in charitable tax exemptions, said that the provision was designed for charitable purposes, not for lobbying against public sector unions or for activities to influence the outcome of elections. “A charity that does those things is not engaging in charitable activities and that puts its tax exempt status in jeopardy,” he said.

Conko told the Guardian that SPN takes “great care to be fully in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.”

The union movement across the Midwest has been particularly targeted by the right-wingers and the billionaires who fund their institutions. We asked some of the Blue America candidates in the region, starting with iron worker and union activist Randy Bryce in Wisconsin. "It’s crystal clear," he told us, "that Ronald Reagan’s 'trickle down' experiment was a failure. It was a total flop. Since the 80’s under Reagan’s reign the income inequality gap has blown apart the haves from the 'maybe I’ll win the lottery one day' hopefuls. That’s about what’s left of the 'American Dream.' One needs to look no further than the White (supremacist) House in order to see that the highest elected position in the land does not need intelligence coupled with hard work to be successful. The only thing standing in the way of returning to a feudal kingdom would be labor unions. Today unions have been attacked so viciously with such malicious propaganda that it’s taking everything we have-- along with facts-- to hang on. It’s a cycle. After the first Great Depression it took the highest union density in our nation’s history to bring about a strong Middle Class. I recently had the opportunity to talk with Robert Reich who made a fantastic movie entitled Inequality For All that everyone really should see to help explain this very topic. Upward mobility is almost a thing of the past. We really need to stand together while we have something left to stand for. The Dream is turning into a nightmare for too many. Hard work gets rewarded less and less in favor of corporate profits. They move up but we don’t. These days it’s all about luck as to who your parents are. Or to win the lottery."

Paul Clements is running for the southwest Michigan seat currently held by rubber stamp Republican and plutocrat Fred Upton. He told me today that "With my union in contract negotiations I have marched several times this summer. The union movement in Michigan has been hit, but we're alive and kicking! Many factory workers in my district have seen their wages fall drastically in the last decade and a half, and, as in so many places, the median wage has fallen here while productivity-- the value workers contribute-- continues to rise. We have some catch up to do. Raising the minimum wage is one step, a right to health care with single payer is another, but we absolutely have to defend and strengthen collective bargaining. Not to coin a phrase, but the people united will never be defeated. If we don't organize to defend our rights we can be sure they will be taken away from us."

Illinois is still a state with a healthy union movement. We also spoke with congressional candidate David Gill, an emergency room doctor, about the battle he sees raging between the forces of unfettered capitalism and working families trying to keep their heads above water. He recalled an historic quote not enough young Americans are aware of today. "I'm proud to be marching with organized labor in Pana, IL this Labor Day," he told us, "because the fight never ends. As Mother Jones said: 'I know that there are no limits to which the powers of privilege will not go to keep the workers in slavery.' Fighting against those powers requires us to be bold in our demands; that's why I stand for a $15/hour minimum wage and tuition-free public universities, colleges, and trade schools. Solidarity forever!"

Tomorrow We Pick The Winner Of The Ken Aden Filter Guitar

Ken and his wife Renea are having a baby in 3 weeks

Given Ken's exemplary military background and his commitment to our nation's veterans, we thought Memorial Day would be the most suitable day to pick the winner of the Filter "Hey Man Nice Shot" guitar. You still have a nice shot yourself-- here

Ken, who is already the stepfather of two children is about to have a baby daughter with his wife, Renea, probably in three weeks-- Tatum. And Ken's excited. This morning he told me that "Of all the things which have happened to me in my life, I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that her birth will eclipse everything else. At this point and time I am focused on her health. At future campaign events I will have baby Tatum in tow or at the hip and speaking about what's right for Arkansas families. Our campaign manager Jake has four children of his own, so for the last few months I have been getting a crash course in parenting."

And, as Mother Jones pointed out in their feature last week, 9 Progressive Vets to Watch in the Battle for Congress a lot has already happened in Ken's life.

Most folks in the United States first heard of this former Army staff sergeant, Iraq vet, and nonprofit organizer in January, when his campaign manager's cat was found murdered with the word "LIBERAL" scrawled across its body (warning: graphic image at the link). This month, Aden paused in the middle of his 253-mile run for hunger-awareness to rescue a motorist from her flipped car. He's hoping to turn back a freshman congressman best known for joining the "shutdown caucus."

Pros: Did we mention that he rescued a woman from a flipped car in the middle of his 253-mile run against hunger?

Cons: At least one resident of his district is willing to use violence against progressives.

Ken's most recent community project, right after being recognized by President Obama as one of the most outstanding community activists in the country and naming him one of the 2012 Cesar Chavez Champions of Change, the Run 2 End Hunger was a huge success. Ken and his team raised over 14,000 cans of food and are still passing it out across northwest Arkansas. But not everyone in his district is focusing on what's positive about his campaign and there are plenty of nay-sayers.

"As our campaign continues to move along in Arkansas," Ken told me this morning, "we have been receiving a great deal of feedback in regard to our stance on Marriage Equality. Being only one of two congressional candidates in the entire state to stand up for what's right, this has of course started to draw a few 'nasty' comments from those on the wrong side of the issue. This, just like anything else is to be expected when you're running a strong race and you aren't afraid to stick your neck out there above the fray. I'm so fortunate to be in this position today and am more than capable of weathering any hateful remarks and or actions directed at this campaign. Almost nine months ago I was working at a job that paid $7.75 an hour and now we are well on track to win this congressional seat and put it back into the hands of the people. The grassroots support we've gotten has meant so much and it has enabled us to continue the fight! The bottom line is, our primary is over and we are in this for the long haul. Some people in NW Arkansas think 'Progressive' is a dirty word. I ask this question of anyone who takes this stance. Just what is wrong with having an open political discussion? Just what's wrong with actually making the attempt to work together? It doesn't matter what your political leanings are, each and every one of us has a unique idea, a suggestion worth looking at seriously that could be used to benefit this district and this nation. There are so many things which need to be corrected and seriously worked on. The most dangerous in my opinion is the toxic injection of corporate money into our political landscape today. Some people including my opponent have made careers out of prostituting themselves out to the highest corporate bidder, but NOT me." Here's the classic 2002 Filter guitar, signed by all the original band members. We'll randomly select its lucky new owner tomorrow afternoon. Here's your last chance to get in on this.

What's An Occupy Movement Candidate?

This week, Mother Jones found 10 candidates running for Congress as supporters of the Occupy or 99% Movement. Most of them are Blue America candidates-- Alan Grayson, Ilya Sheyman, Elizabeth Warren, Norman Solomon, Eric Griego, and Tammy Baldwin, who we are daily urging people to support on our ActBlue House page or our ActBlue Senate page. But there are a four on their list we haven't gotten to yet:

Hakeem Jeffries (New York): "Income inequality is worse now that it has been since prior to the Great Depression," the state assemblyman said during a passionate speech at an Occupy rally in Brooklyn this fall. In January, Jeffries announced that he'd run for Congress in New York's Tenth Congressional District against 15-term incumbent Ed Towns, who'd angered labor unions when he cast the deciding vote in 2005 for the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Since then, Jeffries has picked up endorsements in the Brooklyn district from prominent unions such as the Communications Workers of America.

Prospects: Fair. Jeffries' success could hinge on stopping the Tenth District from being redrawn to exclude his state assembly district, where he's popular.

Lori Saldaña (California): "Lori Saldaña has leapt headlong into the Occupy movement," writes the San Diego Union-Tribune. While that may be a bit of an overstatement, the Democratic former assemblywoman certainly caters to the cause with her campaign slogan: "Fighting for America's middle class." In January, she joined a rally organized by Occupy the Courts in protest of Supreme Court rulings that give corporations the rights of people.

Prospects: Good. A recent poll ranks her as the frontrunner in the primary and just six points behind incumbent Republican Rep. Brian Bilbray. But an independent who may enter the fray could strip away some of her supporters.

Wenona Benally Baldenegro (Arizona): Two years after Democratic Rep. Ann Kirkpatrick lost her Arizona congressional seat to tea party Republican Paul Gosar, she's campaigning to retake it. But she could lose in the primary to Baldenegro, who blames her for alienating supporters with votes against the pro-union Employee Free Choice Act and for job-killing foreign trade bills. A Harvard Law grad who'd be the nation's first Native American congresswoman if elected, Baldenegro has renounced campaign donations from corporate lobbyists and supports taxing the rich and public financing for elections. In late October, she joined six other progressive House candidates-- including Griego, Sheyman, and Saldaña-- to hand-deliver House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) 35,000 signatures from people who "stand with the 99 percent."

Prospects: Fair. Though Kirkpatrick sports name recognition and support from the Democratic establishment, Baldenegro has the endorsement of progressive Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz). More important, the district's boundaries were redrawn last year to include Navajo strongholds that will back her.

Hansen Clarke (Michigan): Sponsoring legislation to forgive student debt has made the Detroit Congressman a hero to thousands of college kids involved with Occupy. During the movement's March 1 "Occupy Education" protests in Washington, DC, activists relayed a statement from Clarke using the famous people's mic: "Young people in America should be able to pursue higher education to achieve their dreams without worrying that this decision will devastate their financial futures."

Prospects: Good. Though he's running against another incumbent Congressman in a consolidated district, Clarke has an early cash advantage and growing list of union endorsements.

We started covering Wenona back in May and she and Hakeem Jeffries are on the Blue America page we use to send a message to the corrupt Democratic power structure in DC. Ever check that page out? Here's part of the description, which was written in the last cycle but still applies today:

Many of us have been disappointed in the Democratic Party (again) this year-- but electing conservatives in the form of Republicans or Blue Dog Democrats is NOT the answer. People with memories that go back beyond last November, though, probably remember just what 8 years of George W. Bush and a Republican Congress meant for our country. And, stretching out from there a bit, some progressives even remember what happened when we split our votes between Al Gore and Ralph Nader. There is a way to send a message to the Inside the Beltway Democratic Establishment. It's called primaries-- and it works better than blindly empowering crazed, angry, racist teabaggers. When Adam Nagourney, Cokie Roberts or Glenn Beck promote Democratic atomization, they're not pumping for progressive values, as Digby pointed out in the post that inspired this Blue America page. She asks how liberals can exert what power we have and have the results be interpreted the way we want them to be-- as a repudiation of corporatism and conservative governance, not as a repudiation of Democratic governance?

There is a fairly compelling theory in political science that says that after political parties come into power, fulfill some pieces of their agenda, get fat and bloated and are finally removed from office, they then tend to deny the reality of their loss and blame it on everything but themselves until they lose enough elections that they finally realize that their ideology has failed. The current GOP is not there yet by a long shot. They are still in the process of doubling down on their radical agenda at a time when the economy is still in ruins, the effects of globalization are being fully felt, the planet is in peril and about to reach a tipping point, and a radical fundamentalist movement is trying to blow people up. I don't think the world can take any more of the right's prescriptions for these problems right now: Lindsay Graham is considered too liberal and neo-Hooverism is their economic program. Yes, the Democrats are corrupt and inept. But the other side is batshit insane.

However, that doesn't mean that there's nothing we can do but wring our hands about how the system is broken and fret ourselves into inertia. The other way to send messages to the Democratic party is through the unsatisfying and often thankless process of primary challenges. Nobody can have any problem understanding that message, not even Adam Nagourney.

It's hard to find challengers and it's no wonder. It's expensive, time consuming and after all your hard work you will probably lose. It takes real commitment and a desire to not only win a seat in Congress but do it by way of unseating an incumbent of your own party with whom you disagree, an act which is guaranteed to make you an odd man out among the party hierarchy. But if you win, it can send shockwaves through the system.

And guess what? We are in another favorable year for primary challenges in recent memory. The insane teabaggers aren't going to allow any rational Republicans to run and the anti-incumbent fever is going to be as high as it's been since 1994. The Democratic base has an energetic activist faction, the netroots can raise money and there is a burning desire to show the party establishment that they cannot take liberals for granted. It's a perfect environment for successful primary challenges.

Back to the Mother Jones article for a moment. There's a postscript from the author, Josh Harkinson: "Many people have contacted me with the names of other Occupy-friendly candidates. If you have suggestions for other races to check out, leave them in the comments or send them to @JoshHarkinson on Twitter, where I've been RTing them." I doubt there's a more Occupy Movement candidate anywhere than George Martinez in Brooklyn, although I'm not certain if he's made his run official yet.

I didn't write to Josh, but I do want to remind readers of this blog about two Occupy candidates who Blue America endorsed for Congress who are very strongly backing the Occupy Movement. Ken Aden is running against corporate shill Steve Womack in northwest Arkansas. "I am a staunch and proud supporter of the Occupy Wall Street Movement," he told us last May. "In fact, I helped folks here in Arkansas start an Occupy chapter in the Northern part of our state. This is a true grassroots movement made up of young people, veterans, students, and folks from across the middle class just like me who are sick and tired of irresponsible corporations buying politicians of both parties while many in the government stand idly by and give corporate America the keys to the proverbial candy store. It's truly nauseating to know that so many politicians can be so easily bought, and not even loose an ounce of sleep over the fact that they are destroying everything which we hold dear. I  firmly believe that more people need to become involved, and stand up for what is right! Corporate greed is the new pandemic in this country. The ratio of CEO pay to that of the average worker is a prime example of the kind of reckless behavior that corporations in this country are exercising on a daily basis. Just look at how many politicians Koch Industries has bought over the last ten years alone. As the next congressman from Arkansas I would support an amendment to destroy the destructive influence of Citizens United. The last time I checked, corporations are NOT and will never be real people."

And the very first candidate Blue America endorsed this cycle was an independent-minded Orlando-area activist, Nick Ruiz, who has been motivated and animated by the exact same values and objectives that animate and motivate the 99% Movement. I asked him for his perspective on the whole idea of 99% candidates. Worth reading:

"For electoral politics, what the Occupy movement reflects is that the average citizen's feeling of being 'outside' of Washington, DC's insider games, has reached the threshold of what will be tolerated by most people. Citizens know they have to fight to get it back again. Democracy, representation, mutual prosperity. It's what the American Revolution represented for so many Americans living in the 18th century.

"For many decades now, too many people have experienced that their interests were not being adequately represented by their Representatives. It has reached the point where they are ready to do something about it. History and more importantly, progress was made in the 1930s, when a whole lot of people, and personalities, like FDR-- made it happen. And progress happened again, in the 1960s, with a mass of supporters and people like MLK and others. It is set to happen again beginning in 2012.

"And once again, we have the same problems they did, with the same lackluster Democratic response from the top. The Democratic Party infrastructure is not ready for us. And the Republicans, of course, want to crush equality of opportunity and representation, in every form. And so we the people, are again-- consciously competing for representation. Competing with the status quo bureaucracy, and the candidates they favor, who are working to ensure that power remains in the unfair hands of those that would enrich them with titles and business favors.

"But this is our United States of America. It belongs to all us. Not just those that have most of the capital and the power that comes with that capital. And we demand a representative seat and a table where truly democratic policy and law-making take place for the benefit of all Americans."

Not your standard garden variety DCCC kind of candidate, huh? You can help Nick win his House race against whichever corporate shill the GOP puts up against him, by contributing here. Let me leave you with George Martinez' Occupy song and video-- and ask you if you think freshly minted Michigan "Democrat" Joe Schwarz will be singing it in the shower?