Washblog

Rob and I met at La Cabana Restaurante in Beacon Hill. We talked  for awhile before I started taking notes, so the conversation below starts in the middle of a thought, but I'll jump right in and maybe readers will imagine just happening by the table and sitting down with us. This is not an exact transcription of the conversation - though as close as I could get.

Rob Holland
I've struggled a long time to imagine a functional economic system that isn't just command-control, that acknowledges individual choice and freedom - as capitalism does - but allows for basic equity. I coined this phrase this morning, prosperity populism. This is prosperity that is shared by all of us. It's not only a matter of wages that people can live on - a whole other subject, but it's also about getting assets to every class. Besides owning a home, how do you get assets to all classes?

Noemie
Prosperity for everyone, rather than just for a powerful few, means that the basic economic decisions have to be under democratic control. I connect this with what you're doing on a community level. Helping people organize to have political impact - to get beyond political hype to actually getting results on issues that affect them every day.

Rob Holland
People are disconnected from the true political meaning of elections -- the impact on their lives. You see this in the national debate where politics looks like 'my team wins over your team'. As a party, we've got to break through that and offer people something serious that connects with their real concerns. This means that we must attack the corporate side of our party. This is the message coming from Edwards. In practice, how do we really engage people? You and I know it's local. That's what we were talking about with the Institute for Washington's Future project we worked on. Small, local, democratic institutions are the way people understand these connections.

Noemie
How do you frame this for people, that it's not a game, that citizens are needed at the grassroots level, to be in there watching what's going on, demanding democratic governance, joining in the process of democratic governance?

Nicholas Smith, First Vice Chair 37th District Democrats, Representative Sharon Tomiko Santos (center)   Representative Eric Pettigrew (center) with constituents.   Senator Adam Kline (right) with constituent

Rob Holland
The way our country is structured, we really have only two parties that are regularly putting forward candidates and getting them elected. One of them, the Democratic Party, is set up so that anyone who comes in and learns the rules and respects what the organization is about, and offers something, for example an organizing skill, becomes part of the institution.

My reason for engaging in the Democratic Party is that I recognize that because we have only these two parties, there must be one that addresses these economic concerns we're talking about. Economic issues from a stance that puts people first -- not from a corporatist stance, not from a stance that is hostile to people.

How do you move the party in this direction?  The way you do that with the Democratic Party is to bring more people in from the community.  This isn't a matter of just getting activated for presidential elections.  It's ongoing. Local politics means you're meeting people, you're getting involved.  You engage in dialog.  You advance progressive ideals and values. So you join the platform committee and you help shape the party's statement of values. Then you hold your elected officials accountable to those values. You're a catalyst.

Washington Democratic Party Chair Dwight Pelz (center) with two members of 37th District Democrats   Rob Holland, Chair 37th District Democrats (left) with Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels   Seattle Councilmember Sally Clark (center) with Rob Holland and constituent.

Noemie
Where the Democratic Party is fighting to be able to represent its values in the face of incredible corporate pressure to abandon them -- the Republican Party has just imploded. We see this incredibly destructive impact on all of us -- denial of science, mixing of religion and state, the obscene wealth gap. Do you see any hope that a grassroots revival among Republicans
could clean it up, move it back to some sanity?

Rob
Yes. That's possible. The parties do respond to grassroots movements. Look at what happened with the Christian Coalition. But Republican policies are basically in support of big business.

When you talk about citizen engagement, the party has to offer something meaningful to attract this. This was the idea behind the first article I wrote as Chair of the 37th. Cynicism is the thing that gets people to withdraw from engagement -- particularly when there's this over-promising during campaigns -- then the under-delivering once people get elected. During the campaigns, there's this "management" of public opinion, and the real issues don't get confronted.

I think with someone like Ron Paul, that's part of his attraction. Here we have a person of some caliber talking about issues that others ignore.  That piques people's interest. It's a clear indication that people really do want to get beyond the celebrity factor in politics. Hillary and Barack have magnetic personalities. But people are tired, they're "done" with politics as a beauty pageant. They're looking for authenticity, they want the real issues to be on the table.

Noemie
We see Kucinich addressing the real issues.  But he's not going to win. He offers too much of a challenge to the corporate powers.  Edwards too, to a lesser extent.  Anyone who is a danger to corporate power has this immense power turn against them. It's like there's so much hope that change is going to come from above. And these national candidates can do a lot in opening up the national debate on issues that matter, as Edwards is doing in hammering on the undemocratic power held by the corporate elites. But that's not enough to get them elected. The real change has to come from below, from the grassroots. We have to figure out how to back our candidates, how to stand up to corporate bullying and theft. That means organizing on a local level.

Rob
How do we get past the beauty pageant. This is where I am. How do we get to dealing with the real issues that face us. There aren't easy answers. When there have been great challenges to meet in our society, we have seen that sacrifices have been made across generations. But we're punting now. We've been distracted.  Looking at Social Security, Medicaid, the national debt. All of those programs are going to have to have huge decisions made and costs that one generation incurs are going to be paid by the generations that come.

One of these musicians is a 37th District member.   Gwen Wrench, past chair 37th District Democrats, with Rob Holland   37th District Democrats meetings are known for having good food. But this is ridiculous!

Noemie
I see that. I see it most dangerously with climate change and I feel cheated on behalf of my son. It's like we're living in a fantasy world, swallowing illusions created by the political consultants and vendors. They get to frame the issues -- we don't even get to say what the issues are. And all the while the glaciers are melting, our economic security is undermined, people in the middle class are being squeezed out. How can we be so blind? How did we take eye off the ball. And make our children pay?

Rob
I wouldn't want anyone to feel guilty about this. We have a recent example of a generation that knows about sacrifice, the WWII generation. Then it seems like the next generation opened up the floodgates on greed. It doesn't help to blame people. There are lots of reasons this has happened. There are cycles, almost a Yin and Yang to it. Now I see people in your son's generation - who are taking on the responsibility. I see them saying 'We're not going to wait. We're going to take this climate thing on now. By ourselves.'

The grassroots structure of the Democratic party is a tool to empower people to be connected with something bigger than themselves.In reality, at the upper echelons of the party, there are decisions that are made about who even gets to run for president. Who we get to choose between depends on who's listening to whom. I tell people, don't be surprised if people are cynical. We're living in times of governmental indifference.

Noemie
You're ok with me writing this in my Washblog piece? That our choices are limited by the power structure at the top of the party? That we have to "attack" the corporate side of the party as you said earlier?

Rob
Yes, put that in there. (laughs) They've already given me an award: I went to the carnival. I got my T-shirt! Look, do you think that Hillary Clinton is taking all this money from pharmaceutical companies and other special interests for no reason?

Noemie
So what I hear you saying is that there are gatekeepers on the national level that shape our choices before there's the opportunity for democratic input?

Rob
We'll see what happens. In 2004, Dean people probably felt this way too. The establishment backed a safe candidate, a calculating -- an over-calculating candidate -- instead of Dean. Kerry was so calculating that he lost the election. That whole thing: 'I was for it before I was against it.' People listen to their gut when they're making political decisions. They listen to their hearts. They want realness. 'Even if I don't agree with you, man, tell me what you think!'

What we get instead is millions paid out to the consultants. Everything is scripted and managed: hair, eyes, language, pictures. It's all, Noemie, so managed that it disconnects the politicians from reality, from real people and real issues. People want to see what is real, even if they disagree.

Noemie
What I believe - what I hope -- is that we will see again what we've seen in the past historically, that people will wake up to their political power. The local political organizations like the 37th, that's where life can get breathed back into politics.

Rob
People are not stupid. They never have been. People are very savvy. If they don't see the party as a vehicle to help them in their lives, they won't be interested. If people aren't participating in the party, it's because the party is not helping them. So how do we make the party relevant? Bush has helped in driving some people to the party. On into the future, we can't continue framing it as "our team vs their team".

I'm in sales. When you want to sell something, you're selling features and benefits, not price. That's what we have to do in the Democratic party. If people feel that the organization is a vehicle where they're being heard and they see benefits to their involvement, they will be involved.

About 3 or 4 years ago I studied the Chicago ward system used back in the late 1800s. The first person who came to your door if you moved into that area, if you were a newly-minted immigrant, or if you were just moving in, was the PCO (Precinct Committee Officer). They'd welcome you. They'd make you feel good. They'd ask you, do you need a job? They'd send that information up to your ward boss. They'd make sure you got helped, that you got connected in your community. Well, Daley was also associated with corruption. That wasn't the best government that people deserved. But we can flip some of that, we can be cognizant of what was of value there. That is the local, small, democratic institution that addresses the real needs of people and communities.

In the 37th, neighborhood safety is one of the issues on people's minds. We have block watches in many of the precincts here. And this is a concern that is relevant for the Democratic organization. We invited the block watch captains in Southeast Seattle's Crime Prevention Council to our meetings. We went to theirs. It's a unique organizing opportunity on both sides. This is just an example. The point is, you find local activists, people who are already hitting the pavement. You build relationships with them. You go to their meetings and find out what their issues are and you connect on those. The key is relationship building at the grassroots level in your community. You don't have a crime prevention council? Connect with the local business council. Go to their meetings. Bring coupons from local businesses to your own meetings.

Another point is that the district organizations can hold monthly meetings that are events that people really want to go to. You make the meetings fun and relevant. You make sure your state representatives to show up. These are the features and benefits.

Noemie
What you're saying here sounds like a case of form follows function. The way you hold the meetings, the way you build relationships and connect with people and meaning in the community is a model for the larger democratic reform you're hoping to achieve.

Rob
Exactly. It goes back to building democracy. In these district organizations you show what it is to have multiple voices, to build consensus. So many people now feel that it doesn't mean anything to vote. When you have a local organization that functions democratically, you help get past this over-cautious, over-managed political process where everything is structured by appearances where it's all about who wins and who loses, where there's over-promising and under-delivering. Where candidates aren't saying anything real. People get so turned off by that.

Noemie
In thinking about the presidential caucuses coming up. What do you see as the "features and benefits" of the caucuses? What's in it for people to attend?

Rob
Now in the 37th we're working on GOTC -- Get-out-the-caucus. Here in Washington we can't control whether we're still going to have an open contest on a national level by February 9. It could be that we spend $10,000 and volunteer labor -- and only 1,000 people show up across the district. The basic reason to attend is that you are participating in democracy. You come to a caucus and you get to have a conversation among your neighbors about who should lead the country. In 2004, people walked away feeling very positive. It's great to talk to people in the neighborhood, meet others. It brings home an understanding that there's value to connecting on the local community level.

Noemie
I see the caucuses as having more progressive potential than the primaries because the people who participate care enough to make it out to these meetings. And so they're likely to care enough to look past the media hype to the real issues. And you participate at the caucuses away from the media noise and campaign rhetoric. There's a parallel, I think, with the local legislative district organizations like the 37th and my own, the 47th. I wonder if you see this too, if you think that these local organizations are well placed to stand up for ideals and policies that are politically risky, to be a leading edge for the party.

Rob
Yes, that's what should happen. The stronger these organizations are on a grassroots level, the more power they give to the mainstream to be true to the party's values. It's almost a form of political evangelism, this organizing people on the local level.