4 ms·
Whether or not you agree with this it has always been the core message of Lessig's campaign: Getting special interest money out of politics should be first prio
by decisiveness 11y ago
Whether or not you agree with this it has always been the core message of Lessig's campaign: Getting special interest money out of politics should be first priority, and until we get enough citizens to care about that, it'll be extremely difficult to pass legislation that goes against any special interest.
Yes, his strategy for getting the message out was broken, but he understands his campaign was quixotic in its initial state (referendum president), and has since agreed the idea was "stupid". Since the beginning, he made known what he really wanted, at a minimum, was the chance to make this issue more of a priority among all candidates.
This is just my opinion, but being a "spoiler" for the party never really appeared to be a likely outcome for Lessig, nor did being an agent for change. The only prospect he ever really had was one of failure. Failure to deliver his message to the masses. And it's a shame, because I think a grass roots movement focused on this message might be successful with the right person and strategy behind it.
- tptacek 11y agoPeople on "our" side of the ideological spectrum are going to have an unpleasant reckoning soon with the fact that the governing that really matters happens at the state and local level. State office campaigns build a back-bench for federal politics, and the states actually do serve as laboratories for democracy, and most of the rulemaking people come into contact with are state and city rules, not federal ones. If you want to fight corruption in politics, start by finding a way to do it in your city or state, and then try to get the idea to spread to other states. That's how cannabis is going to end up legalized; it's how death- with- dignity legislation will happen; it's also how the GOP is going to carve out reproductive health rights. Liberals suck at this. We control a fraction of the state legislatures that the GOP does and we haven't managed to leverage control over urban centers to mitigate that. Meanwhile, the "outsider" liberals all tilt at federal windmills. What did Lessig think was going to happen in the parallel universe where he won? The President doesn't set campaign finance policy. He could have run for a state government office and won.
- dankohn1 11y agoEvidence that you are correct that the focus should be on state legislatures: Matt Yglesias's Vox story, "Democrats are in denial. Their party is actually in deep trouble." http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9565119/democrats-in-deep-trouble http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9565119/democrats-in-deep-trou...
- tptacek 11y agoWow, and here I thought I was just parroting a line Josaiah Bartlett had about school board elections in New Hampshire.
- decisiveness 11y agoWhether nationally or at the state level, it helps the movement to have a figure on the presidential stage doing everything they can to bring special interest issues to light. Lessig's strategy was wrong, but don't think its failure should cause those after him to be discouraged. Although he probably would've had better success running for state office, Citizens United needs to be reversed, and I don't think a state-by-state movement while giving the issue little attention nationally is enough. Although the example of marijuana legislation gaining momentum is relevant, I think it's incomparable as corruption and campaign finance reform legislation would have loads more money invested by special interest groups to oppose it. I think it's a tough fight to be waged at any level, and the more exposure given to it the better.
- anu_gupta 11y agoAnd armchair liberals sit back and whine in their elitist towers. "You're doing it wrong!!!!!"