off the top of my head

Yo. Bring it. Meaning the change we need, not the fear that makes us bleed. Hope is not just a word, we're going to slay the dragon with that sword. Bring hope to the American people, and do what is necessary to wake up the sheeple.

And, here's a fun video that I'm sure some people are going to freak out over. In fact, many already have if you read the comments. Ah, isn't that too bad.

"Oh voters in America, Obama is thy name. If you're voting for change, Obama is the right man. The change will come, Thy will be done, as it is in American Dream."

"Thy will" is referring to the will of the American People. Enjoy:

Heard on NPR

Rosa sat so that Martin could walk.

Martin walked so that Obama could run.

Obama ran so that our children could fly.

Metro Transit Shortfall

The Fall 2008 report from my King County Councilmember Bob Ferguson mentions a proposed $0.50 fare increase that County Executive Ron Sims has put on the table for the budget discussions. We had an increase of 25 cents last year. Costs are going up. Way up. I'd like to talk about the numbers we are talking about.

The question I want to ask in reply to this quarterly update was this:

Has anyone done a calculation to show people how the current fare balances tax revenue and the rider fares? I think it would be interesting to see, and to show the voters in King County, what the fare would be if the system were exclusively paid for by riders, as well as what the taxes would need to be to be able to reduce the fare to zero. Knowing that we are maintaining a balance between these two extremes might go a long way to calming people's anxiety about how much the service costs and just how much it is worth. I currently pay for a $1.75 bus pass on a monthly basis, costing me $63.

I'm sure that someone has done this before, but insomnia gave me the motivation to try and figure it out for myself. The King County Metro Transit, 2007 Annual Management Report gave me the numbers that I'm working with here.

Here's a table of expenses over the last few years.

	2007	2006	2005	2004	2003
Passenger Boardings	117,492,162	109,388,007	104,461,689	101,915,208	99,325,901
Operating Expense	$461,870,312	$433,108,247	$403,402,962	$383,899,455	$365,822,697
Bus Operating Cost per Boarding	$3.65	$3.66	$3.54	$3.45	$3.38
Bus Operations Revenue per Boarding	$0.79	$0.81	$0.81	$0.80	$0.78
Expense per Boarding	$3.93	$3.96	$3.86	$3.77	$3.68

I'm not sure where the exact numbers for "Bus Operating Cost per Boarding" come from, because the Expense / Boardings ratio is the actual math. But what it shows is the amount of money that would be required by people getting on the bus to pay for the operations of the system. This does not include Capital costs, like building the Transit Centers, Bus Barns and Maintenance Yards. I ride the bus, and of course I'd rather pay the $1.75 or even lower, but it's useful to see that increasing the fare to $2.25 would not match the nearly $4 cost to Metro of providing me the service. By the way, $1.75 to $2.25 is a 28.57% increase. Hold that thought.

Let's look at the other side of the coin. Here are some more numbers from the 2007 Operating Report.

Operating Revenue	$95,375,482
Non Operating Revenue	$580,272,272
Sales Taxes	$429,262,198
Total Revenue	$675,647,754

Operating Revenue includes the fares, passes and other things. Sales Taxes are only part of the Non Operating Revenue, although they are the largest part by far. I think we have enough numbers now to play "What If".

If we were going to increase fares so that the 117,492,162 riders covered the entire revenue of $675.6 Million, each person would have to pay $5.75. Per trip. Considering that the calculation they give for how much people actually pay for a ride, $0.81, that's off the charts.

If we were to increase Sales Taxes to cover the entire revenue, we would need a 57.4% increase in that portion of the tax.

My momentum on looking at numbers is running out, after a few hours of looking things up and trying to understand what I'm looking at. So I'm going to finish this by talking about principles. Our revenue sources for transportation are unbalanced in my opinion. Sales taxes are used for Transportation,

The background information about the 2008 fare increase, available here, gives us this paragraph:

Additional revenue would increase financial stability

Sales tax revenues – the bulk of Metro’s funding – can vary dramatically with changes in the economy. By increasing the percentage of its funding that comes from fares, Metro would have a more stable, predictable revenue source.

I don't see that. If we want a "stable, predictable revenue source", we should not be depending on any one source, or even two sources. Sales Taxes do depend on the economy, certainly. But ridership and fare revenue also depend on the economy. People take transit to go back and forth to work, as well as shopping and "touristy" stuff like going downtown for dinner and a movie, or seeing friends. In economic slumps, the number of these trips can vary wildly. Even property tax revenue isn't constant year after year, and while I would personally advocate for putting some of the cost of our transit options beyond just the roads on property tax bills, I don't think it's a 100% solution any more than anything else. What we need is a balance between all of the various revenue sources that provides us with the resources we need to provide the services that we want. I need to repeat that number of 117.5 Million people using the bus again here because those people obviously want Metro service. The only other revenue source that I have not mentioned so far is Income taxes.

Barack Obama wants to give an Income Tax break to 95% of us, with the lower incomes getting more than the higher incomes. John McCain wants to give a tax break to everyone, with the higher incomes getting the most. How much of what we pay in Income Taxes in Washington come back to us to help pay for things like Transit? Not much. Because all of that revenue is collected by the Federal Government and used for the Federal Budget. The State doesn't have an Income Tax. King County can't asses one, even though we have quite a few very wealthy individuals, many of whom WANT their income tax dollars helping to pay for things like transit so their employees can get to work here in Washington State instead of paying for pork projects in other states. But do we have a real proposal about Income Taxes in Washington? Is anyone willing to look at the numbers and discuss how we balance our revenue sources so Metro doesn't get hit with a $70 Million shortfall this year? Anyone? Governor? Media?

Nah... It might make Tim Eyman come up with another hair-brained idea.

John Stewart on the "s" word

And for those who think that clip was doctored:

Saving the King County Fair

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008272692_countyfair16m.html

Reading this article, I am saddened by the lack of imagination and vision in the County Executive's office. I understand that we are in the middle of a financial crunch, but we are also in the middle of a cultural transformation period the likes of which civilization has not seen since the end of the Roman Empire. No, I'm not kidding. The "localization movement" is just getting started. Our energy infrastructure needs to change from centralized to distributed. The job market is changing to "Green Jobs". The next decade will see the greatest transformation of our economy that we have seen since the first Industrial Revolution. King County needs to step up to the plate, not use a hatchet on the budget.

I can think of a number of things that could keep the King County Fair going.

Giving the food vendor spots over to local restaurants instead of national junk-food chains is a start. http://www.tasteofseattle.com/

Open up the market stalls to the Washington State Farmers Market Association. http://www.wafarmersmarkets.com/

In additional to 4H, Future Farmers of America and other agriculture based youth organizations, open up one of the buildings for a giant Jr. High and High School level science fair. http://www.seattlescience.com/

Invite local and national renewable energy manufacturers and service providers to give talks and lectures, instead of vendors like "Jay the Juiceman", talking about how people can increase the energy efficiency of their homes, how they can increase recycling at work, how they can volunteer to help keep up our parks and wild spaces. http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/081016/aqth025.html?.v=75

Make part of the fair a giant job-hunters market, where people looking for work can meet small and medium sized businesses looking for good people. http://www.employment-expo.com/

The King County Agricultural Fair has been going since 1863. Maybe it's time for an evolution. King County has one third of the population of the entire state of Washington. If attendance for the King County Fair has been dropping, it's most likely because we are still thinking of a Rural fair in an Urban/Suburban county. Changing our thinking, and asking ourselves what a Fair would be like if we thought outside of that box, is the first step to re-engaging people in 2008/2009.

I hope that we can find a way to keep the Fair part of our tradition here in King County. Large community events like this are important, and need our support.

Is the BIAW evil?

The BIAW is fighting a huge battle against progressive values in this state. Duh. And it's a wonderful political boggieman.

My good friend Gerry Pollet is running against another good friend, Scott White. He's behind in fundraising, and he did not win the Primary. However, thanks to our anti-party public in Washington State which passed I-872 in 2004, and a U.S. Supreme Court that doesn't believe in using their imaginations, both Gerry and Scott will be on the ballot in November. I'm supporting Scott, for a lot of reasons. But I respect Gerry as well. So this is tough.

Gerry sent out an email yesterday stating the claim that Scott had accepted money from the BIAW. Ok, well, not the BIAW, but an "arm" of the BIAW. A PAC. That he does not name. But it's the BIAW, right? It's all the same boggieman, right?

Good question. And it's a question that I have not found a clear answer to. Gerry refers to an article in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that describes how this all works, and lists all of the Democrats getting money from the BIAW. Or at least the arms of this terrible political octopus.

Several Democrats interviewed about the contributions made a distinction among the BIAW's PAC, the Washington Affordable Housing Council, the Master Builders PAC, the Affordable Housing Council and other local builders' action committees. They said they work with the builders in their communities on a variety of issues, and although those local groups are members of the BIAW, they don't always share the same hardball political bent.

Seattle PI

There's also a PI Blog entry on the topic of Gerry's letter and Scott's response.

Lets put some more links on the table.

BIAW Local Associations

Scott has raised more than $110,000 dollars in this campaign. $800 of that was from the "Affordable Housing Council", which is the political arm of the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties. The MBA-KS is an arm of the BIAW.

I found a page about the AHC on the Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties website. Scott is not on their endorsement list. House Speaker Frank Chopp (D-43) is. And they gave a contribution to another good friend of mine. Richard Conlin, from the Seattle City Council. So did they give $800 to a candidate that they did not endorse? I don't know.

Building homes is not a partisan issue. Should it be? Can we honestly say that anyone who runs on a platform of helping people live the American Dream should not take any contributions from the people who swing the hammers to build those homes?

Public financing will do a lot to help with this. But the first thing we have to do is stop going crazy. Is the BIAW an evil organization? Define evil. I'm getting a headache.

And I still support Scott. Because I believe that he will do a better job building coalitions in Olympia to help support the progressive values and issues that I stand for and that the 46th District Democrats stands for.

The spider and the fly

"'Will you walk into my mortgage ?" said the spider to the fly;
"'Tis the prettiest little mortgage that ever you did spy.
The way into my mortgage is up a variable rate,
And I have many curious things to show when by these rules we skate."
"Oh no, no," said the little fly; "to ask me is in vain,
For who accepts your variable rate can ne'er be out of debt again."

email to my Dad

It's not because it was written by a Republican, it's because this is the truth, and the American People can't handle the truth.

The program that the author is referring to was started under Bill Clinton. The effort was trying to get more minority families to "own their own homes". The program decided that someone qualified as an "owner" when they qualified for a mortgage, so the objective became tainted from the very beginning. We don't "own" our homes until the mortgage is paid off. Until that point, we don't hold the title to the property and it can be taken away if we fall on hard times.

So, the easiest way to show that more minorities "owned" their homes was to make more people qualify for mortgages. Lower the requirements, lower the standards, lower the bar, and "Mission Accomplished". Both James Johnson and Franklin Raines, CEO's of Fannie Mae, got huge kickbacks for their efforts. George W. Bush announced his support for the program in 2002 as well. 10 years from the start of that effort, we have another Great Depression staring us in the face.

Mortgages should be dependent on having an income that can support the payments over the long term. They should have a high initial deposit requirement, Cash On Hand. They should be a fixed rate through the life of the loan. If a family will be spending more than 33% of their income on the mortgage, they should not qualify for the loan. Creating the secondary mortgage market in the 1930's was the only way to keep people in their homes, but it should have been phased out in the 1950's and 1960's when most working people had incomes capable of supporting the structure of the economy. The Reagan tax cuts should not have been passed by Congress. NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, etc should never have been approved. Our manufacturing sector should not be outside of our borders, and the derivatives market should not have been allowed to exist. Thank you Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and the Congress of the 1990's. The Democrats in Congress in the 1990's were a joke, with a few exceptions like Paul Wellstone.

It's a mess. The solution is to get back to what worked. Tariffs to keep manufacturing and jobs here, and a tax code designed to prevent the corrupting influence of extreme wealth and power from accumulating in too few hands. Health care for everyone, College or the Trades for everyone who wants to work (most of us), and high civic participation. A banking system and economic system that rewards work, keeps wealth growing in local communities, and strong families supported by those strong communities.

That's what I want, that's what I'm working for, that's what I'm pushing for.

Chad


---Original message---

Why is it we don't read about this or hear about this in the major media?

Because this is written by a Republican.
Friends:

Here is an explanation of the current economic situation showing the unintended consequences of well-intentioned acts.
I would only add that the Bush administration didn't do anything to derail the ever-worsening situation either.




This crisis was caused by political correctness being forced on the mortgage lending industry in the Clinton era.
Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."
Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.
Instead of looking at "outdated criteria," such as the mortgage applicant's credit history and ability to make a down payment, banks were encouraged to consider nontraditional measures of credit-worthiness, such as having a good jump shot or having a missing child named "Caylee."
Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.
When Democrats controlled both the executive and legislative branches, political correctness was given a veto over sound business practices.
In 1999, liberals were bragging about extending affirmative action to the financial sector. Los Angeles Times reporter Ron Brownstein hailed the Clinton administration's affirmative action lending policies as one of the "hidden success stories" of the Clinton administration, saying that "black and Latino homeownership has surged to the highest level ever recorded."
Meanwhile, economists were screaming from the rooftops that the Democrats were forcing mortgage lenders to issue loans that would fail the moment the housing market slowed and deadbeat borrowers couldn't get out of their loans by selling their houses.
A decade later, the housing bubble burst and, as predicted, food-stamp-backed mortgages collapsed. Democrats set an affirmative action time-bomb and now it's gone off.
In Bush's first year in office, the White House chief economist, N. Gregory Mankiw, warned that the government's "implicit subsidy" of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, combined with loans to unqualified borrowers, was creating a huge risk for the entire financial system.
Rep. Barney Frank denounced Mankiw, saying he had no "concern about housing." How dare you oppose suicidal loans to people who can't repay them! The New York Times reported that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "under heavy assault by the Republicans," but these entities still had "important political allies" in the Democrats.
Now, at a cost of hundreds of billions of dollars, middle-class taxpayers are going to be forced to bail out the Democrats' two most important constituent groups: rich Wall Street bankers and welfare recipients.
Political correctness had already ruined education, sports, science and entertainment. But it took a Democratic president with a Democratic congress for political correctness to wreck the financial industry.

My Letter to Jim McDermott

This is my letter to Rep. McDermott:

Dear Rep. McDermott,

I am furious beyond words at the audacity of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. On the one hand, he refuses to adhere to what we know from history is the only way to secure an economy from the kind of collapse that we are seeing happen before our eyes. And with the other hand he is asking the taxpayers of the United States to give him a hand-out of between $700 Billion and $1 Trillion dollars.

What I understand is that the people who got us into this mess are now begging for our help to get us out. I find that outrageous, and unforgivable.

Please introduce an amendment to the Wall Street Bailout Act currently being reviewed by the US House. The amendment needs to increase the taxes on people earning more than $500,000 per year sufficient to match the amount between $700,000,000,000 and $1,000,000,000,000 that Secretary Paulson is asking for. Pay as you go.

If this amendment is not introduced or does not pass, I ask you to please vote NO on this bailout. Or please explain to me why it is worth giving $700 Billion Dollars to people who have proved to us that they cannot be trusted with the money in words that I can understand.

Thank you for representing us in Washington DC!

Chad Lupkes
Seattle

-----

Now I'm going to say what I wouldn't say in the letter, but if Jim reads this on my blog he'll get the full message. I believe that what Secretary Paulson, President Bush and Fed Chairman Bernanke are doing amounts to criminal negligence at the low end, and TREASON at the high end. They are stealing money from the American People. I want that to end, and if criminal charges can be brought to bear I want all three of them in prison. I'm sick of this.

Read your history, everyone. Read the history of the stock market crash of 1929. Read about the hyper-inflation in Germany in the 1920's due to their debt from World War I and the collapse of their currency. Read the history of how the Roman Empire fell, and about the 1,400 years that passed before we were able to recover from that stock market crash, which is what it was. READ!!!

An important message from Senator Barack Obama

Obama Biden on 60 Minutes

Watch CBS Videos Online

Weather Channel

Trying to get the word out about climate change? Send a link to this video. Maybe it will help.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid823425597/bclid877032950/bctid1758300690

I just got a look...

I love Gmail. I love the interface, the search ability, how save it keeps my computer from spam and viruses, and all the cool features.

I've been using it since early 2005, and I just noticed that I now have 80,210 emails in my inbox. "4496 MB (63%) of your 7083 MB".

I just told that to my wife, and she gave me that look again. She tries to keep her inbox with less than 50.

So I'm a geek. And?

We know the difference

Fierce competition is healthy sometimes. Survival of the fit, and thriving of the winners. Wars have been used throughout history to prove things to individuals and to entire nations. And competition is celebrated. Songs and ballads from all cultures celebrate great battles and wars that were won or lost. We celebrate sports victories, and the losers focus on getting better so they can win next time. It's healthy. Sometimes.

What I've seen over the last few months is why I think the United States can take our place as the moral leader of the world again. Instead of continuing to fight, to compete, the various candidates for office, from President on down to the local, have started to cooperate, and to be the leaders of their forces as we join forces to face a common foe. Right now (except in Washington where we have this top two primary BS) people who competed fiercely in the primaries are joining forces, combining operations, and facing the next hurdle. For the race to the future, as Gov. Schweitzer put it, we are now done with Stage 1. The primaries are over. Next comes Stage 2, the general election.

What I hope, and what I'll be working for, is that we can successfully maneuver through Stage 2 and get to Stage 3, which is where the real work begins.

Stage 1: Primary election
Stage 2: General election
Stage 3: Legislation

I think most Democrats and Progressives know when competition needs to end and cooperation needs to begin. The media is hyping that the Democratic Party is divided. False. If they want division, they should look at the Republicans and Conservatives. And it's sad to see. You'd think they would be honest about what they stand for.

After November, we'll be too busy trying to fix the country and save the planet to worry about little things like partisanship. Right?

We can hope.

Illegal People

Rich sent out a review of a book today.

Illegal People: How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants by David Bacon.

The only "illegal people" I see in our society are the people who ignore the constitution, break the law and then use their wealth, power and influence to get away with it. Those people are much more dangerous to America than anyone who is trying to feed their families by working under the table.

People working in the United States taking jobs away from US Citizens is a problem, but I believe that the problem is with the lack of enforcement of existing law and a poor policy of encouraging and enabling countries with poorly performing economies from taking effective measures to deal with their own level of poverty. We can solve this by enforcing existing laws that say we should be employing our own high school graduates at living wages instead of undocumented workers at lower than poverty wage, and creating trade policies that help raise all boats everywhere. No more letting the rich corporations float their boats while people drown in poverty around the world and increasingly within our own borders.

Chad

King County Initiative 26

Here's my take, somewhat long winded.

At this time, most of the low level grassroots work for the partisan candidates is done by party members and volunteers. Without that backing, many well qualified candidates would be unable to compete with less qualified but well funded candidates. While James Madison begged us in the Federalist Papers not to form 'factions', he also foresaw the ability of accumulated financial capital to control our electoral process because that's what the American Revolution was fought against in the first place. He believed that factions would BE the accumulated capital that took control of our election process. He wasn't too far off base. With the laws as they stand today, much of the campaign financing is raised through the parties, or at least much of the promotion for a candidate or campaign. However not enough of it is raised directly by the parties to enable party members to hold candidates and elected officials to the party platform. The rest of the funds are raised outside of the party, putting candidates in the position of needing to support the positions of their financial backers, not the constituents they are supposed to represent. This was the threat described by Madison.

King County Initiative 26 as presented would cut the parties out of the loop almost entirely. Our platforms would drop in importance even more than they already have, as candidates would no longer be directly associated with the core party positions in the eyes of most of the electorate. I use a party label as the first step of knowing what a candidate stands for, which is what makes it so difficult for me in judicial races. But the real problem comes with the financing of campaigns. If I-26 passes, the amount of money needed to run a campaign and win will not go down, or have any limitations placed on fundraising or expenditures. Transparency would also not improve, because it is outside the scope of the initiative, managed by the PDC. So what it would do is put our candidates in thrall even more to the big money interests that the parties are right now supposed to be a bellweather against, because the parties are membership organizations of, by and for the people who show up.

My bottom line is this: Give us public campaign financing first, then we'll talk about non-partisanship. Let's take big money out of our campaigns first. Until we do that, the party label, and the party infrastructure, is the first defense against having our elected officials completely under the thumb of big money.

Chad Lupkes
PCO SEA 46-2324

Cowards

This is bait. I'm throwing out bait to a coward who is incapable of having a conversation, so instead they just throw up spam, vandalism and fear onto wiki sites.

Bureaucrash, you got your ears on? IP 87.118.101.102, how about you? Probably the same coward.

Want a link to your website where you spread your foolishness? Fine. Here you go:

http://taxslaverysucks.bureaucrash.com

You say that "Socialism Kills". So answer me this, genius. How many people has unregulated capitalism killed over the last 50 years? You can't even define socialism, can you. You have no idea, no clue, and no care for what it means to be a citizen of the world.

Start talking to me, Bureaucrash. Start having a conversation instead of doing your best Chicken Little. If the sky is falling, it's because the conservatives have brought it upon us. And if it takes 50+ years, we will not rest until America is restored to our place at the forefront of Liberalism. That's where President George Washington wanted us to be, remember?

Of course not.

The Netroots Agenda

This is a follow up to the post about Crashing the Party. I'm expanding this into a post that will go onto Netroots Agenda and a few other blogs thanks to Chris Bowers from OpenLeft.com.

One of the challenges facing the Netroots in creating a progressive movement is the transformation of Netroots activism into grassroots action. This panel will discuss the benefits and challenges in working within the Democratic Party on the state and local level. This discussion will include a primer on how to get involved, as well as a discussion on the resistance one may face “crashing the party.” The goal of this discussion is to encourage more Netroots community members to actively engage in politics on the state and local level.

Panelists: Chris Bowers, Jason Melrath, Dante Atkins, Steve Thibodeau, Brian Keeler

Here are some highlights, and my commentary.

"You can see where this is going. Not a single Democrat filed against the Republicans"

This statement from Steve Thibodeau identifies the first item on our list. A list of the positions that are open in the next few election cycles is part of it. This list needs to be available to the grassroots at all times for a number of reasons. We need to be able to see that our frustration over the actions of our elected representatives have a remedy: we can file against them and take their place in the halls of government. Even if we don't win the seat, by taking a principled stand, and making use of the governmental processes that exist to challenge what we don't like, we encourage others to stand up as well, and eventually someone who stands up will get enough support to win.

One of the important points in the discussion that I want to highlight are the differences among the parties. All 50 states have a different set of bylaws and rules for elections to the state central committees.And it's not just state, but local parties as well. My LD website, which I put together during 2003 and 2004 and have kept building ever since, was the first place on the web to collect the bylaws of the local, county, state AND NATIONAL Democratic Party. Our former chair used to get calls from all over the country because it was the only place that people could find the national level document. Has anyone done the work to collect all 50 states?

"Delaware is a deceptively Democratic state," says Jason Melrath. Considering that two of the three counties in Delaware voted for Bush in 2004 with strong margins, I would have to agree. Representative Michael Castle (R) won all three counties with at least 53% of the vote, winning 57% overall. However, Senator Thomas Carper (D) won all 3 Delaware counties with at least 63% of the vote in each area. It seems to depend on who the candidate is, and you'll find that all across the country at every level of the ticket.

Now, the question becomes, how did I know that? Those numbers came from the State Of Delaware Elections System. Wikipedia helps as well, although if I'm looking for something and Wikipedia doesn't have it, I'll keep looking then come back and add it. There are other places that I use and update, mostly wiki systems, that have some of this information.

Knowing what seats are open are one thing. The next step in being able to win those seats is to understand a bit of history. Election history is the record of what races were run, what candidates ran in those races, and how well they did, broken down in as much detail as you can get, down to the precinct level if possible.

Chris talked about the existing party members when he started getting involved not wanting anyone to get involved in Philadelphia. That wasn't the case here in Seattle. Even though we live in a very blue city like Philly, the attitude that I got when I walked in and asked "how can I help" was extremely positive, from everyone. And the more I do, the more I get called on. I'm sure each area of the country, and probably within states, has a different level of encouragement coming from the current party members. Around the country, various groups have come together to combat it, but I'm seeing a trend that I think we need to think about. With so many stories going around about party members trying to hold onto their kingdoms, it's becoming the "norm" when someone decides they might want to get involved. That can be dangerous to our goals, because while it may be true in some areas, there is no way that we can safely assume that everyone currently in the Democratic Party has the attitude that they don't need us. I don't think that we can assume anything. And the only way that we can find out, and take the next step towards getting progressive leadership and ideas on their way to discussion and success, is to walk into the lion's den and see what happens. Don't be afraid of it. If it doesn't work, that's the time to start doing organizing on your own. But let's not make those assumptions. They can lead to trouble that we don't need.

Internal elections are a big part of being active in the party. When I decided to run for the King County Delegate position from my local 46th District, I contacted every Precinct Committee Officer that I could, mostly via email. This was in 2007 after our success in the 2006 election. Everyone running for the specific positions on the board got no challenges and 100% of the vote. It was too easy. The lowest level of the party in Washington is the Precinct Committee Officer. They elect the local party leaders at the Legislative District and County, including the representatives to the State Central Committee. Every state is going to be different, and we need to determine how it works everywhere.

Jason also describes a failure of representation. Delaware has members of the US Senate and the US House who he doesn't consider to be good representatives of the Progressive voices in the state. I'm sure that's true all over. At this point, I want to give my definition of Activism. Activism is the work of finding answers to three questions:

1. What decision is being made?


2. Who is making that decision


3. How do I/we influence that decision?

You can apply that to just about anything. In this context an electoral vote is a decision being made by the people of a district or state. A legislative vote is a decision being made by a committee, a legislative body, or an executive. How we influence the decision depends on the target, and if an individual continues to make decisions counter to the ideals of a political party or movement, that political party and/or movement needs to stand up and either threaten to, or actually accomplish, a replacement of that representative. That's the big picture, and that's how our system was set up in the first place.

So what are the dream tools that activists would like to see on the Web? I have a list of the kinds of things that I would like to see, most of which I've been slowly building if I can't find them elsewhere. Please comment with your ideas.

A Deep-Time Perspective

from Andrew Cohen

The discovery of an evolutionary context radically changes one's relationship to one's own personal experience, with all its ups and downs, challenges and victories. Think about a deep-time developmental context—all the way back to the first moment when something burst out of nothing. As far as we know, fourteen billion years ago there was an empty void, and then suddenly an impulse to become burst forth and became energy, light, matter, life, consciousness. and eventually, you. So putting your own life in an evolutionary context means making the effort to see every aspect of your personal life experience as occurring within this huge process. And even more importantly, it means that you begin to recognize that as the process moves and develops, in order to actually be able to contribute to that development, you need to be aligned with the very edge of evolution itself. Otherwise, you are just going to be following the beaten path, living out the patterns that have been formed by countless others. Without even knowing it, you will simply do what everyone else is doing, and assume that because evolution has blessed you with a very highly developed cognitive capacity that means that you are conscious. But it doesn't necessarily mean you're doing anything new. It doesn't mean you're a change agent. To be a change agent means living on the very edge of this vast process, knowing that it has taken fourteen billion years to reach this point, and actively endeavoring to move the entire process forward through your own transformation. That's conscious evolution.

Netroots Nation, of note

There is a lot about Netroots Nation that people are covering all over the web. All I can do is present what I experienced. Here are some of the things that jumped out at me during the event.

Democracy: A Journal of Ideas

Website: http://democracyjournal.org

This was one of the flyers that I saw on the tables, and I picked it up. This is a quarterly journal "dedicated to putting forward big ideas from across the progressive spectrum." $24 for a yearly subscription. The flyer was black & white, one sided, and looked pretty basic. There is nothing wrong with basic. I'm going to check out the website when I get home. Don't know if I'll order the magazine, but I'm mentioning it here because I want to support progressive media in any form.

Drum Major Institute for Public Policy

Website: http://drummajorinstitute.org

See also

• The MiddleClass.org
• DMIBlog
• TortDeform
• MayorTV

"The Drum Major Institute regards itself as a netroots think tank." They were one of the Exhibitors, and their goal is to be a resource for bloggers on the issues. They're big enough to have publications on several topics, and they have a few different websites about topics and interactive political media. What caught my attention was the way their white paper on Immigration was structured. They go into a basic description of the problem, define a progressive policy stance about the problem, describe what the netroots has done so far on the issue and the role we should take, then break down a plan of action with several steps that we need to take to push our voices into the debate. It is well written, and well presented.

The Commonweal Institute

Website: http://commonwealinstitute.org

I had not heard of this organization until this meeting, but I wanted to mention it because Chris Bowers has been involved for the last few years and he's proud of the work that has been done. I'm glad to hear that, and I look forward to learning more.