The Grassroots Evolution
Jenson Hagen
I got an email this morning from Liz Baxter of the Archimedes Movement encouraging members to spread the word. For those unfamiliar with the Archimedes Movement, this is the grassroots organization spearheaded by ex-governor Dr. John Kitzhaber to address the growing health care crisis.
I look back on how Rep. Earl Blumenauer, Darlene Hooley and other Democratic leaders fought against the Republican sound machine in order to preserve Social Security. Rep. Earl Blumenauer followed up with a personalized effort to raise awareness about the Iraq war. Each of these three cases have something in common. They have made use of the "house party" model of discussion and grassroots organization.
Is this model strong enough to cause significant progress? It raises a fair amount of money and some awareness. This model has potential, but it lacks evolutionary continuity. What do I mean? For starters, we are engaged in these discussions largely because Republicans have presented the issue. (1) We need a system that allows progressives to initiate the conversation. (2) We need to be able to build upon the conversation without losing important ideas. (3) We need a way to gather support in the community and bring increasing numbers of people into the conversation. (4) Finally, we need a mechanism to structure the ideas into agreed-upon policy and ship it off to policy makers for incorporation.
In terms of #1, blogs are a good way to initiate the conversation. With #2, however, blogs break down because ideas just funnel through each week and don't get captured and highlighted when really, really good. The email I got this morning was an effort to address #3. Onward Oregon has a pretty good website to address #4 above. They also have a "dialog" section to develop conversations.
Oregon is an awesome state and it has awesome potential. But the progressive community seems scattered and unstructured. I don't believe we have to continue as such. We don't have to be tied at the hip, but it would be nice to have higher levels of cohesion.
It seems that a web format that allows people to structure ideas would help the progressive community. In my mind, I see something like Wikipedia. With Wikipedia, anyone can start a topic and then others can expand upon it. If there are errors, then those get highlighted. On the political front, this might not be so easy. Some sort of voting mechanism can ensure new ideas affect the main shell only when they gain support among enough people. In reality, developing a conversation about how to provide digital solutions to the grassroots community is an example of why we need this type of digital solution. Right?
As a digital solution adds more capability in terms of #1-4 above, it's potential to make an impact will increase quadratically. I could see the Archimedes Movement benefitting from more web tools. Ultimately, digital solutions, good discussions and the willingness to work together will evolve the grassroots community. Unless people have better ideas . . .
|
0 readers like this.
Like it!
|
11:59 p.m.
Nov 18, '08
In my mind, I see something like Wikipedia. With Wikipedia, anyone can start a topic and then others can expand upon it. If there are errors, then those get highlighted. On the political front, this might not be so easy. Some sort of voting mechanism can ensure new ideas affect the main shell only when they gain support among enough people.
This is hilarious. Once again, someone is proposing a Wikipedia model for developing legislation -- with the usual caveat that we need "some sort of voting mechanism" to handle approvals of specific changes.
Yeah. That's called the legislative process. Someone proposes a policy. Other people can propose amendments. We have discussions about those amendments. Eventually, we have votes to approve (or disapprove) amendments. In the end, there's an up or down vote on the final proposal as amended.
Really, Thomas Jefferson and his pals kinda had this right a while ago. Sure, we could web-ify the whole thing, but that's just a web app that reflects a much older process.
6:20 a.m.
Nov 19, '08
Can I just point out that there already is a very dynamic and well coordinated national grassroots campaign focusing on fundamental health care reform? It's Health Care for America NOW! That's not to say there isn't room for more state level organizing - but let's start by not reinventing the wheel.
Nov 19, '08
I propose that when a Senator leaves office under a corruption conviction that we offer a full amnesty, provided that they come clean about all their corrupt activity, name names and testify under oath.
It is beyond the ability to imigine just how much grief, suffering, loss of international status, degredation of the environment, and derailing of good ideas has gone down at the hands TS. While we're at it, it's time to either force disclosure or bar active CIA assets from sitting in the Congress.
Nov 19, '08
Uhhh...I was definitely on the Alaska Senate thread when I posted that!
Nov 19, '08
Dan P.,
I have to say I find it interesting that people like you love to take a blog thread and totally change the subject matter to promote your own cause.
11:18 a.m.
Nov 19, '08
Huh? I don't get it; I was responding directly to the question of organizing models for winning health care reform, and the organization to which I referred is not one that I'm affiliated with.
Nov 19, '08
Is HCAN really doing anything on the ground? I have yet to see anything grassroots from them here in Oregon. It seems like it is more or less the same groups and same names. Just bloggin'...
6:08 p.m.
Nov 19, '08
I'll leave it to the OR HCAN crew to respond on that one; nationally folks seem very encouraged by word that Tom Daschle will be HHS Secretary.