Putting People Back in Politics: The Revival of American Democracy

© 2020 Edward Schneier. All rights reserved.

Second Edition

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse 12/17/2019

ISBN: 978-1-7283-3936-8 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-7283-3937-5 (hc)

ISBN: 978-1-7283-3926-9 (e)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Contents

Preface

Introduction

Chapter 1    The Changing Face of American Politics

The Importance of Participation

The Demise of the Democrats

The Professionalization of Politics

Learning from Tammany Hall

The Lessons of 2018

Chapter 2    Putting People Back in Politics

Getting Started

What Is at Stake in 2020?

The Long Road to Reform

Mapping the District

What About Issues?

Chapter 3    Campaign Strategies and Tactics

What Works and What Doesn’t

Candidates

Organization

Voter Registration

Raising Money

Hunting Butterflies

Spending Money

Winning Votes

Get Out the Vote

The Anatomy of Victory

Chapter 4    Advocacy

Elections, Issues, Agitation and Lobbying

The Party System and the Pressure System

The Changing Scope and Bias of the Pressure System

Effective Lobbying

Legislative Intelligence

People Power

Appendix A: The One Hundred and One Most Marginal House Districts in 2020

Appendix B: The Eighteen Most Marginal Senate Districts in 2020.

Preface

This my tenth book, the first nine of which were with traditional publishing houses. I chose to self-publish this one because none of the publishers I contacted could produce a book in fewer than six months. Thanks to Authorhouse for being able to do this.

I wrote Putting People Back in Politics largely in response to a number of friends and neighbors who asked me– as a student of politics– what they could do to change what they see as very dangerous turns in the direction of American politics. Although the manuscript has not gone through the standard review process, I have had the very useful advice of friends and former colleagues, most of whom advised me not to be too academic. Well, old habits die hard, but I tried. And I think I have made some of the best analyses of political scientists and professionals accessible if not always exciting. You can skip through some of the material if you like, but if you truly want to work for change I think it will be worth your while to read on. Many of the most sincere and dedicated activists I know are, unfortunately, wasting their time or actually acting in ways that might even be counter-productive. Politics remains as much art as science. It is, at the same time, a well-studied activity that operates according to increasingly well-understood rules. While there are no clear rules of political efficacy, there are ways of doing things that are manifestly more effective than others.

I want particularly to thank Ellen Boneparth, Ron Hayduk, Virginia Martin, Gareth Rhodes, Ken Sherrill, Christina Russenello, Elliot Schneier, Jeff Stonecash, Lynda Stratigos and above all my wife Margrit for their help and comments.

Introduction

Putting People Back in Politics

Seldom in American politics has there been an eruption of political activism comparable to that which arose in the wake of the 2016 elections. Literally tens of millions took to the streets and town meetings offering time, money and passion to the causes of peace, good government, civil rights and economic justice. Most of them were wasting their time. In politics, sincerity and conviction win grace points but little influence. Even money– the mother’s milk of politics– doesn’t make much of a difference if it is poorly spent; and the sad fact is that much of it is.

On the other side, hundreds of thousands of people– many of them mobilized and connected by and through these town halls and demonstrations– took to the streets in another manner to begin the process of actually changing the system. In 2018, a record number of citizens reported having worked in a political campaign. Many of them were effective.

The purpose of this book is to offer a short guide to effective political action, particularly in the realms of political campaigns and legislative advocacy. The premise, that ordinary people can make a difference, has become almost quaint. Political campaigns and political advocacy (also known as lobbying) have been professionalized to the point where citizens are treated more as audiences than participants. This is not to denigrate the skills of political professionals, most of whom are very good at what they do. In becoming more effective citizens we can learn a lot from those for whom politics is a way to make a living. But in making a case that ordinary people can make a difference, I also want to argue that they should. As smart and capable as most political consultants and lobbyists are, they have become the core actors in an increasingly dysfunctional system. Real change can come only when we put people back in politics. Putting people back in politics is not just effective as a strategy, it is good for democracy. More than ever we need to revive and extend a culture of participation that involves treating us as citizens rather than consumers. What follows here is not simply a how to manual, but a why to screed on the state of our polity and what needs to be done to bring the country back from a slide toward authoritarianism, intolerance and dysfunction.

There are all kinds of ways in which elections are won and lost. Sophisticated uses of polls, social media, computer algorithms and advertising are claimed to be able increasingly to target and deliver blocs of voters to those candidates who can afford them. Campaign management has become a big business. Between elections, similarly sophisticated paid lobbyists exert a strong influence on behalf of those who can best afford to hire them. The premise here, however, is that in the long run nothing is more effective than a well-organized movement of average citizens. Clever advertising can swing votes, but nothing is more effective than direct contact with someone you already know. Facts and numbers count for a lot in lobbying, as does money, but nothing is more effective than testimony from an informed constituent as to how the law impacts real people in a legislator’s district.

In 1970 my then co-author, William T. Murphy, Jr. and I wrote a book called Vote Power as handbook for student volunteers working under the umbrella of the Princeton-based Movement for a New Congress which helped elect a number of anti-war Representatives and Senators in the midterm elections. While the Movement was successful in channeling the energies of activists into electoral politics, it was neither intended nor able to follow up its election victories with policy advocacy. The war dragged on for another four years, and while many of the Senators and House members it helped elect became effective spokespersons for progressive causes, the students who helped elect them, in effect, went back to their classrooms.

Murphy and I published a second edition of the book in 1974 when Nixon’s Watergate problems were closing in, and the failure of our intervention in Vietnam was widely perceived. As we moved through the 1970s, however, the allure of citizen participation in politics was fading. A whole new cadre of political campaign professionals took over the management of most state, local and national election campaigns. They replaced the rusty, often moribund party organizations and political machines that had been at core of political campaigns for nearly a century. While few mourned the passing of the Daley organization in Chicago or New York’s Tammany Hall, the rise of what became known as candidate-centered campaigns has taken us into a not-so-brave new world of political dysfunction. The premises of Vote Power, with its emphasis on face-to-face politics was becoming quaint.

In the wake of Watergate, Murphy and I wrote in 1974, political cynicism is reaching an all-time high. No lecture on democratic theory is going to convince many Americans that corruption is not part and parcel of the electoral process.¹ Forty plus years later, these perceptions have, if anything, become increasingly more negative. Consider the state of our major political institutions. In a 2016 Gallup survey of citizen trust in their political institutions, the Supreme Court and the Presidency were rated very or somewhat worthy of trust by just 36%; the Congress by just 9%. The last time a majority of Americans trusted the Court was in 2002; the Presidency in 2009; and not once since the 1970s has Congress earned majority support.² Academic studies provide little encouragement. In 2006, Thomas E. Mann, of the generally liberal Brookings Institution, and Norman J. Ornstein of the conservative American Enterprise Institute titled their study of Congress The Broken Branch: How Congress is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track. The title of the follow-up study, published in 2012, It’s Even Worse than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided With the New Politics of Extremism, pretty much sums up the consensus of how political scientists view recent developments.³

Cynicism, doubt and despair, no matter how warranted, are wasted emotions unless backed with incentives to act. And the only kinds of effective acts available to most of us involve working within the institutional structures already in place. We don’t need Syria to remind us that armed resistance is fruitless in a garrison state, a cure probably worse than the disease. Demonstrations are useful tools of consensus building, publicity and mobilization, but they change nothing. Tea Party demonstrations in 2014 and 2015 did help to create networks of believers, their bonds strengthened by social media that began to bear fruit only when they were linked to political campaigns and backed by the financial and professional resources of very traditional Republican Party and wealthy interest groups. For those seeking change not catharsis, there are really only two kinds of effective political action. In the words of the Princeton’s Institute of Advanced Study political theorist Michael Walzer,

The two kinds are pressure politics and electoral politics, and I am inclined to think there are no other kinds. To choose pressure politics means to try to influence those people who already hold power, who sit in official seats, and who may even be responsible for the outrages against which the movement is aimed. To choose electoral politics is to try to dislodge those people and to plant others in their seats… . Of course, the two choices overlap in important ways … but it is worth emphasizing the two simply because they exhaust the range: changing the policies men [and women] make and changing the men [and women] who make policies. Changing the political system within which policy is made is rarely a real option for citizen activists.⁴

To put a more positive spin on Dr. Walzer’s last point, changing the system in which policy is made is possible, but only, ironically, by changing or influencing the people who are already in office. To change the rules of the game, in other words, one must first change the rule-makers. Whatever the social goals which motivate people to involve themselves in politics, the best way to achieve those goals is to elect candidates who share them or to scare the hell out of those who do not. Some politicians are shrewd. Some are simply dumb. Some are corrupt and can be bought. All know how to count votes. Nothing is more important to the future of American society than the way in which those votes are distributed. On election night they don’t count issues, preferences or emotions; they count votes. And between elections, politicians don’t look back, they think about the next election.

Professionals have important roles to play in campaigns: election laws, particularly those regarding campaign finance are complex and important. Professionals are, by definition, less likely to accept the often-biased assurances of local leaders who will say things like don’t worry about the third ward, I’ve got that covered, or don’t even bother with Mudville, they’re all against us. Even in small-town local elections, it is useful to have someone other than the candidate to take the heat for some necessary decisions (like telling the local nutcake why his or her help is not wanted, or explaining why the candidate cannot be in two places at the same time). There is, moreover, a whole library of books, and a large industry of trained and experienced campaign managers who understand how to conduct and use public opinion polls, create effective promotional materials, make media buys, and so on. Even the best managed of these campaigns, however, leave something to be desired, and a strong case can be made the very paradigm on which the professional campaign edifice is built has become increasingly less effective.

Concerned citizens can make a difference, especially when they understand the changes in our political system that have increasingly divorced public policy from public attitudes. The old British adage that trained civil servants should be kept on tap but not on tap applies with special force to professional political operatives. For although there are things that require expert knowledge– every campaign, for example, needs access to legal advice, media buys, voter targeting, financial reporting and fund raising– too many modern campaigns are run by very talented people with all these skills but little knowledge of the districts in which they are working. In 2016, there were many active Democrats in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin who could have told Hilary Clinton that her campaign was floundering; her very smart campaign professionals didn’t figure that out until election night.

Let us at the outset be very clear about the very real limits of citizen power. Any individual’s personal influence is likely to be small. Your vote, in any given election, is unlikely to affect the outcome: in a typical congressional district in 2018 it was as little as 1/350,000th of the total. Many, if not most legislative districts, moreover, have been constructed as to not be competitive. Running against incumbents has always been especially difficult. In 2016, 97% of the members of the House and 93% of Senators running for re-election won, and