Grassroots Progress: A Progressive Coalition for California’s North Coast and Beyond

We believe in government of, by and for people –– not of, by and for corporations.

The power of Wall Street is undermining life for the rest of us on Main Street. This is totally unacceptable. We will continue to work for a truly democratic and sustainable future. We need to create millions of green jobs, end the tax cuts for the wealthy, close corporate tax loopholes, implement a transaction tax on stock markets and cut the overblown military budget that fuels endless wars.

Corporate power is fundamental to what ails our country. Unless civic engagement and government action are able to restrain their quest to maximize profits, the large corporations are accountable only to investors. The remedy is genuine democracy.

It’s not possible to map out a plausible path toward a green, sustainable future without directly challenging corporate power. Ominous climate change is a clear and terrible consequence of corporate dominance and government inaction. We cannot, we must not, accept the idea of “corporate personhood” that allows large companies to ravage the earth while further enriching the already rich.

The U.S. military -- the most polluting institution on the planet -- represents an apex of destructive technologies. If we don’t reorder our priorities, their cascading effects will be horrendous for future generations and, overall, for life on Earth.

As we work for social justice, for protection of nature, for human rights, for peace, we’re giving voice to our common human spirit.

After receiving more than 25,000 votes for Congress from people in California’s North Coast district in the primary election of 2012, I’m proud that our campaign is now evolving into a long-term grassroots coalition for progressive change. Looking ahead, we can organize to create and sustain multi-year, coordinated efforts to boost grassroots capacities -- and elect genuine progressives in the process.

To overcome a status quo of perpetual war, extreme Wall Street power, chronic inequities and environmental degradation, we will keep working for peace, social justice, a healthy planet -- and genuine democracy.

The imperative to create a better world continues.  Martin Luther King Jr. said, “The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Our challenge is to do all we can to hasten the process.

Norman Solomon
Founder
Coalition for Grassroots Progress 

GrassrootsProgress.org

read more >>

David Brooks, Tom Friedman, Bill Keller Wish Snowden Had Just Followed Orders

by Norman Solomon
CommonDreams.org. June 17, 2013

Edward Snowden’s disclosures, the New York Times reported on Sunday, “have renewed a longstanding concern: that young Internet aficionados whose skills the agencies need for counterterrorism and cyberdefense sometimes bring an anti-authority spirit that does not fit the security bureaucracy.”

Agencies like the NSA and CIA -- and private contractors like Booz Allen -- can’t be sure that all employees will obey the rules without interference from their own idealism. This is a basic dilemma for the warfare/surveillance state, which must hire and retain a huge pool of young talent to service the digital innards of a growing Big Brother.

With private firms scrambling to recruit workers for top-secret government contracts, the current situation was foreshadowed by novelist John Hersey in his 1960 book The Child Buyer. When the vice president of a contractor named United Lymphomilloid, “in charge of materials procurement,” goes shopping for a very bright ten-year-old, he explains that “my duties have an extremely high national-defense rating.” And he adds: “When a commodity that you need falls in short supply, you have to get out and hustle. I buy brains.”

That’s what Booz Allen and similar outfits do. They buy brains. And obedience.

But despite the best efforts of those contractors and government agencies, the brains still belong to people. And, as the Times put it, an “anti-authority spirit” might not fit “the security bureaucracy.”

In the long run, Edward Snowden didn’t fit. Neither did Bradley Manning. They both had brains that seemed useful to authority. But they also had principles and decided to act on them.

read more >>

Snowden Saw What I Saw: Surveillance Criminally Subverting the Constitution

CommonDreams.org

So we refused to be part of the NSA's dark blanket. That is why whistleblowers pay the price for being the backstop of democracy

What Edward Snowden has done is an amazingly brave and courageous act of civil disobedience.

Like me, he became discomforted by what he was exposed to and what he saw: the industrial-scale systematic surveillance that is scooping up vast amounts of information not only around the world but in the United States, in direct violation of the fourth amendment of the US constitution.

The NSA programs that Snowden has revealed are nothing new: they date back to the days and weeks after 9/11. I had direct exposure to similar programs, such as Stellar Wind, in 2001. In the first week of October, I had an extraordinary conversation with NSA's lead attorney. When I pressed hard about the unconstitutionality of Stellar Wind, he said:

    "The White House has approved the program; it's all legal. NSA is the executive agent."

It was made clear to me that the original intent of government was to gain access to all the information it could without regard for constitutional safeguards. "You don't understand," I was told. "We just need the data."

In the first week of October 2001, President Bush had signed an extraordinary order authorizing blanket dragnet electronic surveillance: Stellar Wind was a highly secret program that, without warrant or any approval from the Fisa court, gave the NSA access to all phone records from the major telephone companies, including US-to-US calls. It correlates precisely with the Verizon order revealed by Snowden; and based on what we know, you have to assume that there are standing orders for the other major telephone companies.

It is technically true that the order applies only to meta-data. The problem is that in the digital space, metadata becomes the index for content. And content is gold for determining intent.

This executive fiat of 2001 violated not just the fourth amendment, but also Fisa rules at the time, which made it a felony – carrying a penalty of $10,000 and five years in prison for each and every instance. The supposed oversight, combined with enabling legislation – the Fisa court, the congressional committees – is all a kabuki dance, predicated on the national security claim that we need to find a threat. The reality is, they just want it all, period.

So I was there at the very nascent stages, when the government – wilfully and in deepest secrecy – subverted the constitution. All you need to know about so-called oversight is that the NSA was already in violation of the Patriot Act by the time it was signed into law.

When I was in the US air force, flying an RC-135 in the latter years of the cold war, I was a German-Russian crypto-linguist. We called ourselves the "vacuum-cleaner of the sky" because our capability to gather information was enormous at the time. But it was always outward-facing; we could not collect on US targets because that was against the law. To the US government today, however, we are all foreigners.

I became an expert on East Germany, which was then the ultimate surveillance state. Their secret police were monstrously efficient: they had a huge paper-based system that held information on virtually everyone in the country – a population of about 16-17 million. The Stasi's motto was "to know everything".

So none of this is new to me. The difference between what the Bush administration was doing in 2001, right after 9/11, and what the Obama administration is doing today is that the system is now under the cover and color of law. Yet, what Snowden has revealed is still the tip of the iceberg.

read more >>

Clarity from Edward Snowden and Murky Response from Progressive Leaders in Congress

by Norman Solomon
Common Dreams
June 13, 2013

House Speaker John Boehner calls Edward Snowden a “traitor.” The chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, labels his brave whistleblowing “an act of treason.” What about the leadership of the Congressional Progressive Caucus?

As the largest caucus of Democrats on Capitol Hill, the Progressive Caucus could supply a principled counterweight to the bombast coming from the likes of Boehner and Feinstein. But for that to happen, leaders of the 75-member caucus would need to set a good example by putting up a real fight.

Right now, even when we hear some promising words, the extent of the political resolve behind them is hazy.

“This indiscriminate data collection undermines Americans’ basic freedoms,” Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison said about NSA spying on phone records. He added: “Our citizens’ right to privacy is fundamental and non-negotiable. . . . The program we’re hearing about today seems not to respect that boundary. It, and any other programs the NSA is running with other telecom companies, should end.”

The other co-chair of the Progressive Caucus, Raul Grijalva, was blunt. “A secretive intelligence agency gathering millions of phone records and using them as it sees fit is the kind of excess many of us warned about after the Patriot Act became law,” he said. “Continuing this program indefinitely gives the impression of being under constant siege and needing to know everything at all times to keep us safe, which I find a very troubling view of American security policy.”

And Grijalva said pointedly: “We’re being assured that this is limited, supervised and no big deal. When we heard the same under President Bush, we weren’t comfortable taking his word for it and moving on. I feel the same today.”

The five vice chairs of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are a mixed civil-liberties bag.

read more >>

Historic Challenge to Support the Moral Actions of Edward Snowden

In Washington, where the state of war and the surveillance state are one and the same, top officials have begun to call for Edward Snowden’s head. His moral action of whistleblowing -- a clarion call for democracy -- now awaits our responses.

After nearly 12 years of the “war on terror,” the revelations of recent days are a tremendous challenge to the established order: nonstop warfare, intensifying secrecy and dominant power that equate safe governance with Orwellian surveillance.

In the highest places, there is more than a wisp of panic in rarefied air. It’s not just the National Security Agency that stands exposed; it’s the repressive arrogance perched on the pyramid of power.

Back here on the ground, so many people -- appalled by Uncle Sam’s continual morph into Big Brother -- have been pushing against the walls of anti-democratic secrecy. Those walls rarely budge, and at times they seem to be closing in, even literally for some (as in the case of heroic whistleblower Bradley Manning). But all the collective pushing has cumulative effects.

In recent days, as news exploded about NSA surveillance, a breakthrough came into sight. Current history may not be an immovable wall; it may be on a hinge. And if we push hard enough, together, there’s no telling what might be possible or achieved.

The gratitude that so many of us now feel toward Edward Snowden raises the question: How can we truly express our appreciation?

A first step is to thank him -- publicly and emphatically. You can do that by clicking here to sign the “Thank NSA Whistleblower Edward Snowden” petition, which my colleagues at RootsAction.org will send directly to him, including the individual comments.

But of course saying thank-you is just one small step onto a crucial path. As Snowden faces extradition and vengeful prosecution from the U.S. government, active support will be vital -- in the weeks, months and years ahead.

read more >>

The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein

by Norman Solomon
CommonDreams.org
Friday, June 7, 2013

Dear Senator Feinstein:

On Thursday, when you responded to news about massive ongoing surveillance of phone records of people in the United States, you slipped past the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. As the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, you seem to be in the habit of treating the Bill of Rights as merely advisory.

The Constitution doesn’t get any better than this: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

The greatness of the Fourth Amendment explains why so many Americans took it to heart in civics class, and why so many of us treasure it today. But along with other high-ranking members of Congress and the president of the United States, you have continued to chip away at this sacred bedrock of civil liberties.

As The Guardian reported the night before your sudden news conference, the leaked secret court order “shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of U.S. citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk—regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.”

One of the most chilling parts of that just-revealed Surveillance Court order can be found at the bottom of the first page, where it says “Declassify on: 12 April 2038.”

Apparently you thought—or at least hoped—that we, the people of the United States, wouldn’t find out for 25 years. And the fact that we learned about this extreme violation of our rights in 2013 instead of 2038 seems to bother you a lot.

Rather than call for protection of the Fourth Amendment, you want authorities to catch and punish whoever leaked this secret order. You seem to fear that people can actually discover what their own government is doing to them with vast surveillance.

Meanwhile, the Executive Branch is being run by kindred spirits, as hostile to the First Amendment as to the Fourth. On Thursday night, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper issued a statement saying the “unauthorized disclosure of a top secret U.S. court document threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation.”

That statement from Clapper is utter and complete hogwash. Whoever leaked the four-page Surveillance Court document to Glenn Greenwald at The Guardian deserves a medal and an honorary parade down Pennsylvania Avenue in the Nation’s Capital. The only “threats” assisted by disclosure of that document are the possibilities of meaningful public discourse and informed consent of the governed.

read more >>

Bradley Manning Is Guilty of “Aiding the Enemy”—If the Enemy Is Democracy

by Norman Solomon
CommonDreams.org
June 5, 2013

Of all the charges against Bradley Manning, the most pernicious—and revealing—is “aiding the enemy.”

A blogger at The New Yorker, Amy Davidson, raised a pair of big questions that now loom over the courtroom at Fort Meade and over the entire country:

*  “Would it aid the enemy, for example, to expose war crimes committed by American forces or lies told by the American government?”

*  “In that case, who is aiding the enemy—the whistleblower or the perpetrators themselves?”

When the deceptive operation of the warfare state can’t stand the light of day, truth-tellers are a constant hazard. And culpability must stay turned on its head.

That’s why accountability was upside-down when the U.S. Army prosecutor laid out the government’s case against Bradley Manning in an opening statement: “This is a case about a soldier who systematically harvested hundreds of thousands of classified documents and dumped them onto the Internet, into the hands of the enemy—material he knew, based on his training, would put the lives of fellow soldiers at risk.”

If so, those fellow soldiers have all been notably lucky; the Pentagon has admitted that none died as a result of Manning’s leaks in 2010. But many of his fellow soldiers lost their limbs or their lives in U.S. warfare made possible by the kind of lies that the U.S. government is now prosecuting Bradley Manning for exposing.

read more >>

Our Twisted Politics of Grief

In the "endless war," some kinds of grief are more useful than others

by Norman Solomon
CommonDreams.org
Monday, May 27, 2013


Darwin observed that conscience is what most distinguishes humans from other animals. If so, grief isn’t far behind. Realms of anguish are deeply personal—yet prone to expropriation for public use, especially in this era of media hyper-spin. Narratives often thresh personal sorrow into political hay. More than ever, with grief marketed as a civic commodity, the personal is the politicized.

The politicizing of grief exploded in the wake of 9/11. When so much pain, rage and fear set the U.S. cauldron to boil, national leaders promised their alchemy would bring unalloyed security. The fool’s gold standard included degrading civil liberties and pursuing a global war effort that promised to be ceaseless. From the political outset, some of the dead and bereaved were vastly important, others insignificant. Such routine assumptions have remained implicit and intact.

The “war on terror” was built on two tiers of grief. Momentous and meaningless. Ours and theirs. The domestic politics of grief settled in for a very long haul, while perpetual war required the leaders of both major parties to keep affirming and reinforcing the two tiers of grief.

From the political outset, some of the dead and bereaved were vastly important, others insignificant.

For individuals, actual grief is intimate, often ineffable. Maybe no one can help, but expressions of caring and condolences can matter. So, too, can indifference. Or worse. The first years of the 21st century normalized U.S. warfare in countries where civilians kept dying and American callousness seemed to harden. From the USA, a pattern froze and showed no signs of thawing; denials continued to be reflexive, while expressions of regret were perfunctory or nonexistent.

Drones became a key weapon—and symbol—of the U.S. war trajectory. With a belated nod to American public opinion early in the century’s second decade, Washington’s interest in withdrawing troops from Afghanistan did not reflect official eagerness to stop killing there or elsewhere. It did reflect eagerness to bring U.S. warfare more into line with the latest contours of domestic politics. The allure of remote-control devices like drones—integral to modern “counterterrorism” ideas at the Pentagon and CIA—has been enmeshed in the politics of grief. So much better theirs than ours.

Many people in the United States don’t agree with a foreign policy that glories in use of drones, cruise missiles and the like, but such disagreement is in a distinct minority. (A New York Times/CBS poll in late April 2013 found Americans favoring U.S. overseas drone strikes by 70 to 20 percent.) With the “war on terror” a longtime fact of political life, even skeptics or unbelievers are often tethered to some concept of pragmatism that largely privatizes misgivings. In the context of political engagement—when a person’s internal condition is much less important than outward behavior—notions of realism are apt to encourage a willing suspension of disbelief. As a practical matter, we easily absorb the dominant U.S. politics of grief, further making it our politics of grief.

The amazing technology of “unmanned aerial vehicles” glided forward as a satellite-guided deus ex machina to help lift Uncle Sam out of a tight geopolitical spot—exerting awesome airpower in Afghanistan and beyond while slowing the arrival of flag-draped coffins back home. More airborne killing and less boot prints on the ground meant fewer U.S. casualties. All the better to limit future grief, as much as possible, to those who are not us.

However facile or ephemeral the tributes may be at times, American casualties of war and their grieving families receive some public affirmation from government officials and news media. The suffering had real meaning. They mattered and matter. That’s our grief. But at the other end of American weaponry, their grief is a world of difference.

Let’s face it: in the American political culture of our day, all grief is not created equal. Not even close.

read more >>

Obama in Plunderland: Down the Corporate Rabbit Hole

By Norman Solomon
Common Dreams
May 9, 2013

The president’s new choices for Commerce secretary and FCC chair underscore how far down the rabbit hole his populist conceits have tumbled. Yet the Obama rhetoric about standing up for working people against “special interests” is as profuse as ever. Would you care for a spot of Kool-Aid at the Mad Hatter’s tea party?

Of course the Republican economic program is worse, and President Romney’s policies would have been even more corporate-driven. That doesn't in the slightest make acceptable what Obama is doing. His latest high-level appointments -- boosting corporate power and shafting the public -- are despicable.

To nominate Penny Pritzker for secretary of Commerce is to throw in the towel for any pretense of integrity that could pass a laugh test. Pritzker is “a longtime political supporter and heavyweight fundraiser,” the Chicago Tribune reported with notable understatement last week, adding: “She is on the board of Hyatt Hotels Corp., which was founded by her family and has had rocky relations with labor unions, and she could face questions about the failure of a bank partly owned by her family. With a personal fortune estimated at $1.85 billion, Pritzker is listed by Forbes magazine among the 300 wealthiest Americans.”

A more blunt assessment came from journalist Dennis Bernstein: “Her pioneering sub-prime operations, out of Superior Bank in Chicago, specifically targeted poor and working class people of color across the country. She ended up crashing Superior for a billion-dollar cost to taxpayers, and creating a personal tragedy for the 1,400 people who lost their savings when the bank failed.” Pritzker, whose family controls Hyatt Regency Hotels, has a vile anti-union record.

Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker? What’s next? Labor Secretary Donald Trump? SEC Chairman Bernie Madoff?

The choice of Penny Pritzker to run the Commerce Department is a matched set with the simultaneous pick of Tom Wheeler -- another mega-fundraiser for candidate Obama -- to chair the Federal Communications Commission.

With crucial decisions on the near horizon at the FCC, the president’s nomination of Wheeler has dire implications for the future of the Internet, digital communications and democracy. For analysis, my colleagues at the Institute for Public Accuracy turned to the progressive former FCC commissioner Nicholas Johnson, who called the choice “bizarre.”
 

read more >>

Don’t Vent, Organize—And “Primary” a Democrat Near You

By Norman Solomon
Common Dreams
May 1, 2013

Progressives often wonder why so many Republican lawmakers stick to their avowed principles while so many Democratic lawmakers abandon theirs. We can grasp some answers by assessing the current nationwide drive called “Primary My Congressman” -- a case study of how right-wing forces gain ground in electoral terrain where progressives fear to tread.

Sponsored by Club for Growth Action, the “Primary My Congressman” effort aims to replace “moderate Republicans” with “economic conservatives” -- in other words, GOP hardliners even more devoted to boosting corporate power and dismantling the public sector. “In districts that are heavily Republican,” the group says, “there are literally dozens of missed opportunities to elect real fiscal conservatives to Congress -- not more ‘moderates’ who will compromise with Democrats. . .”

Such threats of serious primary challenges often cause the targeted incumbents to quickly veer rightward, or they may never get through the next Republican primary.

Progressive activists and organizations could launch similar primary challenges, but -- to the delight of the Democratic Party establishment -- they rarely do. Why not?

Here are some key reasons:

*  Undue deference to elected Democrats.

Members of Congress and other elected officials deserve only the respect they earn. All too often, for example, plenty of Congressional Progressive Caucus members represent the interests of the establishment to progressives rather than the other way around.

*  Treating election campaigns more like impulse items than work that requires long-term planning and grassroots follow-through.

The same progressives who’ve spent years planning, launching and sustaining a wide range of community projects are apt to jump into election campaigns with scant lead time. Progressives need to build electoral capacity for the long haul, implementing well-planned strategic campaigns with candidates who come out of social movements and have a plausible chance to win on behalf of those movements.

read more >>

CLOSE TO HOME: Promise not to cut is nothing like tax pledge

By NORMAN SOLOMON
Press Democrat.com
Published: Tuesday, April 9, 2013 

President Barack Obama is proposing to reduce the Social Security cost of living
adjustment. And the president is also putting cuts in Medicare benefits on the
negotiating table. But Social Security keeps vast numbers of seniors out of poverty,
and Medicare is vital to keeping many people alive.

At this historic moment, a principled position would be to commit to fully defending
Social Security and Medicare benefits, as well as the federal Medicaid program that
funds Medi-Cal in our state. But the North Coast's new congressman, Jared Huffman,
has been hedging.

Hundreds of Huffman's constituents have urged him — via letters, petitions, phone
calls and personal visits — to take a clear stand by committing not to vote to cut any
Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid benefits. Huffman showed notable disdain for
this no-cut plea in his public Facebook page on March 10 when he posted that he
“won't be bullied from the left or the right into signing Norquistian vote pledges to
outside groups.”

read more >>

Pledge of Dignity - Why isn’t Rep. Jared Huffman promising to defend Social Security and Medicare?

BY ALICE CHAN

Last week, a Press Democrat editorial praised Rep. Jared Huffman for refusing to join colleagues who have promised to "vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security benefits—including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need."

What's going on here?  On Feb. 28, I joined a group of a dozen constituents meeting with Huffman's district director, urging the congressmember to sign a letter initiated by Representatives Alan Grayson and Mark Takano. That letter includes a promise to vote against any cuts to benefits in those three vital programs.

Why did we request that our congressmember sign this letter? Republicans and some Democrats in Washington are pushing for cuts to Social Security benefits in cost of living adjustments, as well as raising the Medicare eligibility age. Those changes would directly affect the most vulnerable among us—the elderly and others with low and moderate income, who rely on these earned benefits to provide the basic necessities of life.

What was Huffman's response? On his Facebook page a few days later, he stated: "I won't be bullied from the left or the right into signing Norquistian vote pledges to outside groups."

I was surprised to see our request characterized as a "Norquistian pledge." Promising to stand up for the more vulnerable among us is the very opposite of Grover Norquist's extreme conservative anti-tax pledge. I was even more surprised to see myself portrayed as a bully. As a constituent, I and those with me were participating in the traditional democratic process.

Why won't Huffman make this particular promise to his constituents? He has certainly made other promises, such as committing to vote against any infringements on a woman's right to choose.

Signing the letter would signal in a very strong way to his district that he is committed to fully defending Social Security and Medicare benefits.

It's disturbing that Huffman has refused to sign the Grayson-Takano letter. You can ask him to do so at www.pdsonoma.org.

Alice Chan is chair of Progressive Democrats Sonoma County.

Link to original

read more >>

What Happened to the CDP Leadership Commitment to Single-Payer Healthcare?

Dear fellow Democrats,

When we had a Republican governor sure to veto legislation for single-payer healthcare, the legislature passed a single-payer bill. Twice.

During the past two years, since we’ve had a Democrat in the governor’s office, the legislature hasn’t moved single-payer legislation.

And this year, activists have struggled to find a single Democrat in the legislature willing to even introduce a single-payer bill.

There is every indication that Governor Brown doesn’t want such a bill on his desk -- and the Democratic leadership in the legislature is obliging.

The behavior of our Democratic governor and current legislators stands in stark contrast to the California Democratic Party platform, which trumpets its support for single payer:

“California Democrats believe that health care is a human right not a privilege. The CDP recognizes the health and well-being of Californians cannot continue to be based on arbitrary private and public financial decisions and therefore advocates legislation to create and implement a publicly funded (single-payer), privately delivered, fiscally tractable, affordable, comprehensive, secure, high-quality, efficient, and sustainable health care system for all Californians.”

Nice talk. Where’s the walk?

The current behavior of Democratic leaders on this issue is unacceptable.

Progressive Democrats Sonoma County

www.pdsonoma.org

Coalition for Grassroots Progress

www.grassrootsprogress.org

read more >>

For the latest from Progressive Democrats in Sonoma County

Click Here

How to Build a Grassroots Power Base

This article originally appeared in the November 26, 2012 edition of The Nation magazine.

By Norman Solomon

Millions of Americans are eager, even desperate, for a political movement that truly challenges the power of Wall Street and the Pentagon. But accommodation has been habit-forming for many left-leaning organizations, which are increasingly taking their cues from the party establishment: deferring to top Democrats in Washington, staying away from robust progressive populism, and making excuses for the Democratic embrace of corporate power and perpetual war.

It’s true that many left-of-center groups are becoming more sophisticated in their use of digital platforms for messaging, fundraising and other work. But it’s also true that President Obama’s transactional approach has had demoralizing effects on his base. Even the best resources—mobilized by unions, environmental groups, feminist organizations and the like—can do only so much when many voters and former volunteers are inclined to stay home. A month before the 2010 election, Obama strategist David Axelrod noted that “almost the entire Republican margin is based on the enthusiasm gap.” A similar gap made retaking the House a long shot this year.

For people fed up with bait-and-switch pitches from Democrats who talk progressive to get elected but then govern otherwise, the Occupy movement has been a compelling and energizing counterforce. Its often-implicit message: protesting is hip and astute, while electioneering is uncool and clueless. Yet protesters’ demands, routinely focused on government action and inaction, underscore how much state power really matters.

To escape this self-defeating trap, progressives must build a grassroots power base that can do more than illuminate the nonstop horror shows of the status quo. To posit a choice between developing strong social movements and strong electoral capacity is akin to choosing between arms and legs. If we want to move the country in a progressive direction, the politics of denunciation must work in sync with the politics of organizing—which must include solid electoral work.

Movements that take to the streets can proceed in creative tension with election campaigns, each one augmenting the other. But even if protests flourish, progressive groups expand and left media outlets thrive, the power to impose government accountability is apt to remain elusive. That power is contingent on organizing, reaching the public and building muscle to exercise leverage over what government officials do—and who they are. Even electing better candidates won’t accomplish much unless the base is organized and functional enough to keep them accountable.

Politicians like to envision social movements as tributaries flowing into their election campaigns. But a healthy ecology of progressive politics would mean the flow goes mostly in the other direction. Election campaigns should be subsets of social movements, not the other way around. Vital initiatives to break the cycles of capitulation and lack of accountability will come from the grassroots.

read more >>

Update: October 2, 2012

Here’s an update on the transition from our 2012 campaign for Congress to an ongoing coalition for progressive change:

* We’re continuing to work to defeat two of the most powerful heartless Republicans in the House -- Budget Committee chair Paul Ryan and Armed Services Committee chair Buck McKeon (“Congressman War Buck”).

To help Rob Zerban’s campaign defeat Paul Ryan, click here.

To help Lee Rogers’ campaign defeat Congressman War Buck, click here.

* This is the last week that donations can be made online to help eliminate our campaign’s debt, which -- thanks to the generosity of so many people -- has shrunk to about $2,500. If you can help out at this point, click here.

* Next week I’ll announce my endorsements in key races.

* Later this month, we’ll unveil the name and details of plans for our long-term coalition.

I’m so appreciative that we can continue to work together, building on a campaign that received more than 25,000 votes in the primary and reflected the progressive values so many people hold dear. What’s past is prologue in our work for social justice, environmental protection, civil liberties, human rights and peace!

Best wishes,
Norman

Empty chair, empty suits ... and corrosive silence

The most chilling moment of arrogance and ignorance during Mitt Romney's convention speech may have been when he derisively said "President Obama promised to begin to slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet" -- and the Republican delegates erupted with laughter.

On the same day, Shell Oil gained approval to drill beneath the Arctic Ocean off Alaska.

“By opening the Arctic to offshore oil drilling, President Obama has made a monumental mistake that puts human life, wildlife and the environment in terrible danger," said Rebecca Noblin, Alaska director at the Center for Biological Diversity. "The harsh and frozen conditions of the Arctic make drilling risky, and an oil spill would be impossible to clean up. Scariest of all, the Obama administration is allowing Shell to go forward without even having the promised oil-spill containment equipment in place.”

Such news underscores why defeating the Republican ticket is so necessary -- and insufficient. All too many elected Democrats are silent, or muffle their voices, when leaders of their own party undermine progressive ideals. As a progressive Democrat, I'm convinced that we can, and must, do better.

While our 2012 campaign for Congress has officially ended, we'll continue to work together -- to defeat the GOP's forces of arrogant ignorance, and to challenge Democratic incumbents when they don't live up to their avowed principles.

Norman Solomon

Let’s Beat Paul Ryan Twice

August 30, 2012

The 2012 Republican Party is offering notable leadership for a century. Maybe the 18th century.

It's as though the Bill of Rights never happened and social conscience never took hold.

“We don’t want to turn the safety net into a hammock that lulls able-bodied people into lives of dependency and complacency, that drains them of their will and their incentive to make the most of their lives,” Paul Ryan says.

Ryan is determined to slash and burn our social compact. He's not fit to become vice president -- or to remain chairman of the House Budget Committee.

Voters in his Wisconsin congressional district will be deciding whether to re-elect Paul Ryan. Let's defeat him twice!

Democrat Rob Zerban is running against Ryan for Congress. You can help Rob in that effort by chipping in now.

Rob says: "Once Wisconsinites and voters across our country learn the truth about Ryan's radical plot to end Medicare as we know it, de-fund women's health care, and preserve tax breaks for millionaires, they'll vote against him not just once, but twice."

One of Rob's standout positions is: "I will not support a war without an official declaration of war from Congress."

read more >>

A Note from Norman—with Exciting News

August 16, 2012

We're moving into an exciting realm of political work. After coming up short (by 0.1 percent of the primary ballots) in the race for the North Coast congressional seat, our campaign is now building a long-term progressive coalition!

It's necessary -- and insufficient -- to defeat Republican candidates. We need to elect genuine progressives who'll fight hard against the GOP agenda and push back when Democratic leaders give ground to it.

Today, I'm endorsing Dr. David Gill for an open seat in Congress. I hope you'll support him too.

Several months ago, David beat the Democratic Party machine's candidate in the 13th Congressional District primary in Illinois. Now he's running against a right-wing Republican nominee. (Is there any other kind these days?) Let's flip the seat from red to blue and elect a progressive in the process.

"I won't take a penny from Wall Street or corporate interests," David says. "My campaign is powered by people like you."

We can provide people-power for David, a longtime physician who has never held political office. We're partnering with Progressive Democrats of America to do phonebanking. You can get started by contacting Pat Johnstone at pat4marin@gmail.com, and she'll get you set up to make calls from home.

read more >>

What’s Next, What’s Vital

With the last votes counted, it’s painful to come up short by just one-tenth of one percent. But our campaign has never been only about winning an election.

From the outset, I’ve said this campaign is about strengthening vital movements that can transform our country.

Now, I want to ask you to stay involved as our campaign evolves into an ongoing grassroots coalition for progressive change.

read more >>

Norman Solomon Issues Statement on Outcome of California’s Second Congressional District Election

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 26, 2012

Democrat Norman Solomon has narrowed the vote margin with Republican Dan Roberts to only 172 votes throughout the six counties comprising California's 2nd Congressional District.

Fewer than 1,000 ballots remain to be counted in Sonoma County, the only county still tallying ballots in the district.  While the 172-vote gap is expected to narrow still further as Sonoma County processes its final outstanding ballots, it has become numerically very unlikely Solomon will overtake Roberts as these few remaining ballots are tallied.

Accordingly, this morning Norman Solomon contacted Dan Roberts and offered congratulations on his second-place finish in this "top two" primary race.

read more >>

Too close to call: Vote count not finished

June 7, 2012

Dear Friends,

This campaign is not over.

Here's the latest: The race for 2nd place -- between Norman and Republican Dan Roberts -- is extremely close. We will have greater clarity by Friday. This is not unusual in California elections nowadays, due to the large number of votes-by-mail. Tens of thousands of vote-by-mail ballots have not been counted -- including many from Marin and Sonoma counties, Democratic Party strongholds.

At this point, with 12 candidates in the race, Republican Roberts is at 15.3% and Norman is at 14.2%. They are separated by only 1,379 votes, after numbers trended in our direction all night. (At the beginning of vote-counting, Roberts was 4% ahead of Norman; the gap has shrunk to 1.1%.)

Democrat Jared Huffman is in first with 37 percent. Roberts and Norman are fighting for 2nd in this top-two primary at roughly 15%, and Democrat Stacey Lawson is in 4th place with about 10%.

This is NOT a recount. The original vote count is simply not finished, and second place is too close to call. We are monitoring the counting of the votes-by-mail in various counties.

I am so proud of what we have achieved. Our campaign has inspired progressive activists and leaders nationwide.

We pledge to fight on until every vote is counted. As we get new numbers, we will keep you posted.

I want to thank everyone for waging one of the strongest grassroots campaigns for Congress anywhere in the country.

Onward,

Dan Mullen
Campaign Manager

MoveOn Members Recommend Norman Solomon in California’s Second Congressional District

Tuesday, May 29, 2012
For Immediate Release

MoveOn.org Political Action has sent out emails to its large base announcing that Norman Solomon is the "recommended" candidate for Congress in California's North Coast district in the June 5 primary. Solomon received the recommendation as a result of his first-place finish in an online poll of MoveOn.org members in the Congressional district. The polling was part of the MoveOn-powered Progressive Ballot Guide project.

"I am truly honored to have earned this recommendation following the survey of MoveOn's tens of thousands of members throughout the 2nd Congressional District," said Norman Solomon. "The polling gives a sense of whom grassroots voters in the district support -- not whom big money donors and corporate interests support. Our campaign is obviously energizing the grassroots."

read more >>

Mike Farrell’s anti-war M*A*S*H note for you

The legendary actor Mike Farrell -- B.J. Hunnicut in the "M*A*S*H" television series -- is one of the most respected voices for peace and human rights in the entertainment industry. Please check out his one-minute video in which he mentions "M*A*S*H" and "those who get rich off war" -- and recommends a pro-99% candidate for Congress who will say: "No, you don't get your war!"

To help promote our powerful message, please click here to make a contribution.

read more >>

Solomon dedicated to political activism, progressive values

Originally published by the Marin Independent Journal on Monday May 7

By Richard Halstead - Marin Independent Journal

About 25 years ago, West Marin resident Norman Solomon obtained his FBI file by filing a Freedom of Information request.

Solomon, 60, discovered the FBI began keeping tabs on him in 1966 when he picketed for the desegregation of a Maryland apartment complex at age 14.

read more >>

Solomon on Track to Be Top-Two Finisher in June Primary

Norman Solomon's campaign for California's new North Coast Congressional district (CA-02) released the results of the most recently conducted poll in the race, showing Solomon in second place in the 12-way contest, in which the top two finishers in June's primary election will advance to the November general election.

read more >>

Solomon Wins Endorsement from Teachers Union

The California Federation of Teachers has endorsed Norman Solomon for Congress in the new North Coast district spanning from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

“We look forward to working with you to promote issues pertaining to California’s educational system, public employees, and protecting the interests of working families,” the union’s president, Joshua Pechthalt, said in a letter to Solomon.

Solomon, an independent progressive Democrat, responded by vowing to work for full support of public education and working people. “The status quo is unacceptable,” he said. “Students, teachers, parents and communities deserve robust public investment in our schools. This is an unwavering commitment that I intend to fulfill as the North Coast’s representative in Congress.”

read more >>

Three congressional challengers very worth supporting

Originally published at Salon.com

By Glenn Greenwald - Salon.com

Excerpt:

When it comes to Congressional candidates, it just doesn’t get any better than Norman Solomon. If you have any residual doubt, just look at this remarkable 2007 TV appearance he did on CNN with Glenn Beck, which he wrote about here, when he used the opportunity to detail and denounce the effect of corporate ownership of America’s establishment media (including CNN). He’s been doing this for 30 years and there’s zero chance he will change or compromise any of it if he wins. I can’t even imagine what it’d be like to have Norman Solomon in Congress, but I’d certainly like to see it. You can — and, I hope, will — support his campaign here.

read more >>

Thank You for Voting for Norman as a DFA Grassroots All-Star!

You came through!

Thousands of people responded by voting for me online when Democracy for America, the national organization founded by Howard Dean, conducted its straw poll for the strongest Democratic candidates for Congress.

Because of your support, I finished #2 among nearly 200 candidates nationwide -- winning our campaign quick endorsement and support from national DFA!

read more >>

Norman Solomon will give us the straight scoop

Originally published by the Times-Standard

Dan Hamburg / For the Times-Standard

Since 2001, Humboldt County has contributed roughly $350 million to fighting the nation's wars (costofwar.com). I'm supporting Norman Solomon because this expenditure represents a catastrophic misuse of public funds and because Norman, among a group of strong candidates, is uniquely qualified to help stop the bleeding.

When I finally met Norman last year, after decades of reading his work, I wondered why such a smart and accomplished activist would think the U.S. House was the best place to work for progressive political change.

My own experience as a congressional representative in the early 1990s was that despite big numbers, progressives never got much traction in the corporate-dominated, money-drenched atmosphere of Washington, D.C. Even when the efforts of the numerically significant Progressive Caucus were combined with those of the Black and Hispanic caucuses, “leadership” routinely ignored our issues from campaign finance to fair trade to job creation.

Nearly 20 years later, what's changed? If anything, D.C. politics have drifted steadily to the right, and the pernicious influence of money has been even more firmly imbedded in the American political system.

read more >>

Solomon Campaign Scores Major Victory

Norman Solomon’s campaign for Congress scored a major victory last weekend when opponent Jared Huffman failed to win the endorsement from California Democratic Party delegates, who cast votes from all over the new congressional district that stretches from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

Despite the fact that some of the delegates were appointed by officials who conditioned their appointment on voting in his favor, Huffman received endorsement votes from just under 48 percent of the delegates. In sharp contrast to the balloting on the same day for Michael Allen and Wes Chesbro (two of his fellow Assembly members seeking re-election who received overwhelming support from party delegates), more than half of the Democratic Party delegates rejected Huffman’s candidacy.

read more >>

Donahue stumps for Solomon

Originally published by The Press Democrat on Tuesday Jan. 10, page B1

By GUY KOVNER - THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Phil Donahue, left, campaigns for North Coast congressional candidate Norman Solomon in Sebastopol on Monday, Jan. 9, 2012. (CHRISTOPHER CHUNG/ PD)

Former TV talk show host Phil Donahue said Monday he is enjoying his first foray into congressional politics by stumping for fellow liberal Norman Solomon on the politically green North Coast.

"I am having a very exciting time," Donahue, 76, said at a meet-and-greet at Two Acre Wood, a co-housing community in Sebastopol.

Solomon, a Marin County author and activist, is one of 11 candidates seeking to represent the new coastal district in Congress, a wide-open race triggered by Petaluma Democrat Lynn Woolsey's decision to retire this year.

Donahue, white-haired and wearing rimless glasses, built a national reputation as host of an Emmy Award-winning syndicated talk show that ran for 26 years, ending in 1996, and that ranked 29th on TV Guide's list of the top 50 all-time best shows in 2009.

read more >>

Uncle Sam is making the wrong choices

Originally published by The Press Democrat

By Norman Solomon

On a recent day in Petaluma, two very different events spotlighted grim results of upside-down priorities from the federal government.

Upwards of 600 people gathered for an early breakfast at the Veterans Memorial Hall to raise money for the Committee on the Shelterless (COTS), a nonprofit organization that last year sheltered nearly 2,000 individuals, served more than 127,000 hearty meals and distributed 800,000 pounds of food to the needy.

We heard moving stories about — and from — people whose lives have been transformed by active compassion, generosity and their own hard work. But, as speakers lamented, COTS must turn away many who need help.

Charities and other nonprofits are struggling to cope with deep economic wounds that have been festering for years. The dire consequences are far more widespread than private agencies can possibly heal.

Only government has the capacity to provide economic remedies for social distress of this magnitude. But government is failing.

read more >>

Rep. John Conyers endorses Norman Solomon for Congress

U.S. Rep. John Conyers, the 24-term Democrat from Michigan, has endorsed independent Democrat Norman Solomon for Congress in California's 2nd District, which stretches from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

“We especially need Norman's leadership now because my colleague Lynn Woolsey, a great fighter for peace, is retiring,” Conyers said.

Conyers' support for Solomon follows recent endorsements from Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Dolores Huerta, legendary co-founder of the United Farm Workers union.

Conyers, who has served in the House since 1965 and is the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee and the Congressional Black Caucus, stressed Solomon's leadership on foreign policy, war and health care issues.

“Norman has always been at the forefront of fighting to stop the invasion of Iraq, the occupation of Afghanistan, and now, the threatened attack on Iran,” said Conyers.

read more >>

The Norman Solomon Food Stamp Diet

Originally published by SanRafael.Patch.com

The progressive candidate for the 2nd Congressional District goes shopping in San Rafael on a lean budget to demonstrate a point.

By Christian Kallen | SanRafael.Patch.com

To be clear, Norman Solomon is not on Food Stamps. The American journalist, media critic, author and antiwar activist has a nice home in Inverness, a working wife, and is a current candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives for the 2nd Congressional District.

read more >>

Campaign Announces Endorsements From Rep. Raul Grijalva and Dolores Huerta

Two of the nation’s most influential Latino leaders -- Rep. Raul Grijalva, co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Dolores Huerta, legendary co-founder of the United Farm Workers union -- have endorsed Democratic candidate Norman Solomon for Congress.

The endorsements come in the race for an open seat in California’s new coastal district stretching from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

Congressman Grijalva (D-AZ) said: “I have decided to endorse Norman Solomon, my friend and a great progressive activist, advocate, and author, in his primary race for U.S. Congress.”

Grijalva added: “This is a time for bold leadership. This is a time for activist solutions. This is a time to elect historical, not rhetorical, progressives -- in other words, progressives who have shown with their entire lives that they are on our side. That's why I am so proud to take the unusual step today of endorsing my friend and progressive ally, Norman Solomon, in his campaign to win the primary for Congress from northern California.”

read more >>

Longshore Union Endorses Norman Solomon for the North Coast Congressional Race

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) is endorsing Norman Solomon for California’s 2nd Congressional District where Representative Lynn Woolsey is soon retiring.

“We’re supporting Norman Solomon because he’s the strongest advocate for working families and the best qualified to make real change in Washington,” said ILWU International Secretary-Treasurer Willie Adams.

Adams says Solomon was the only candidate who scored 100% on the key issues, including:

• Protecting Social Security without raising the retirement age or restricting benefits;
• Protecting Medicare and moving toward a “Medicare for all” system for all Americans;
• Opposing unfair trade agreements with countries like Colombia where human rights are ignored and union members are constantly murdered.
• Raising taxes on the richest 1% and corporations to make sure they pay their fair share.

read more >>

Time for a new New Deal

Originally published by the Marin Independent Journal

By Norman Solomon
Guest op-ed column -- Marin Independent Journal

FOR MANY PEOPLE across Marin County, the job crisis is all too real.

Never mind the news reports that Marin's official unemployment rate — at 7.8 percent — is "the lowest in the state."

That's scant comfort to the jobless and underemployed, scrambling to make ends meet.

The new normal of high unemployment has become so chronic that some pundits crow about a mere downtick.

read more >>

Solomon Will Not Accept Corporate PAC Money

Congressional candidate Norman Solomon announced today (Sept. 6) that he will not accept any corporate PAC money in his campaign for the open seat in California's new North Coast district, which extends from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon border.

Solomon, a progressive Democrat who is campaigning this week in Humboldt and Mendocino counties, said that lofty rhetoric about the need for campaign finance reform must be matched by action. "Huge corporations seeking to fatten their profit margins are using Political Action Committees to pressure and sway members of Congress," he said. "I don't want their money. I want to be accountable to voters, not Wall Street."

Taking the unusual step of pledging not to accept a single campaign contribution from a corporate PAC, Solomon declared: "We're not supposed to have government of, by and for the large corporations -- or Wall Street. Many of the biggest companies are posting record profits while many millions of Americans are out of work. Home foreclosures are sky-high, schools are losing teachers, retirement security is in jeopardy. This is completely unacceptable."

read more >>

Sean Penn stumps in Petaluma for Congressional candidate

Originally published by The Press Democrat

Photo: Crista Jeremiason / The Press Democrat

Actor Sean Penn offered his support Tuesday for Democratic Congressional candidate Norman Solomon at a campaign event at McNear's Mystic Theater and Music Hall in Petaluma,CA

read more >>

Norman Solomon: Budget Deal Is a “Huge Mistake”

Congressional candidate Norman Solomon released this statement today:

This is a very bad deal and a huge mistake. Instead of capitulating to Republican ideologues in Congress, we should stand our ground on behalf of seniors, children and other vulnerable Americans. All the rhetoric about “shared sacrifice” rings hollow when the vast majority of us are being sacrificed to the benefit of big banks and Wall Street.

There are plenty of sensible and effective ways to reduce the deficit -- including a transaction tax on Wall Street, an end to the Bush tax cuts for the very wealthy and a major reduction in military spending. But the bipartisan dealmakers in Washington are ripping up the social compact and slashing the safety net that’s essential for vast numbers of Americans.

One of the most dangerous aspects of this deal is that it explicitly sets the stage for future actions to undermine Medicare. This scenario is a betrayal that strikes at the heart of precious values, and it’s among many of the current threats to vital social programs. I am committed to defending Social Security and Medicare on the campaign trail and as a member of Congress.

read more >>

Solomon Calls for ‘All-Out Defense of Social Security’

Please click image to enlarge it.

A day after President Obama urged fellow Democrats to go along with “trimming benefits” for Social Security and other safety-net programs, North Bay congressional candidate Norman Solomon called for “an all-out defense of Social Security.”

Solomon, a progressive Democrat who was elected as an Obama delegate to the 2008 Democratic National Convention, said Tuesday [July 12] that Social Security cuts would be “a tragic mistake, undermining our nation’s best values as well as its future.”

“Our leaders should be fighting to protect seniors, children, the jobless, the disabled and other vulnerable Americans, not throwing Social Security on the table and pulling out knives,” he said.

“I support the efforts by many Democrats in Congress to resist this looming assault on seniors and others who depend on Social Security and Medicare,” Solomon added.

“The idea of cutting Social Security and Medicare is not only a moral outrage -- it is a disastrous approach that would end up costing us dearly in the long run, severely damaging people’s quality of life and escalating healthcare costs,” Solomon said. “This is not how a civilized society solves its budgetary problems.”

read more >>

This full-page ad was printed in the May 20-26 edition of the Pacific Sun:

See also "North Bay Candidates for Congress Differ on Nuclear Power."

Please click image to enlarge it.