NDN Blog

There is a new breeze blowing through Washington this week. Yes it has hit 70 degrees outside. Spring is in the air, and it has lightened everyone's step a bit. But the real change is what is happening in the governing party and in the Capitol. The people's business is starting to get done.

It has been a remarkable few weeks here in DC. A payroll tax cut for small businesses to help provide a modest boost to the economy was signed into law, passing the Senate with 11 Republican votes. A serious bipartisan immigration reform plan outline was advanced. The final financial regulatory reform package is taking shape. The President offered up a thoughtful vision on how to improve the nation's education system, and is about to pass a major overall and expansion of the college student loan program. Competitive - and what we all hope were fair - elections were conducted in Iraq. And of course, the big one - modernizing and improving our health care system - is close to passage. 

After a fitful first year, the Democrats are learning, however clumsily, to become the governing party. None of the three Democratic leaders - Obama, Reid, Pelosi - have ever been in their position when the Democratic Party was in such a strong position with the public, or had so much power in Washington. Democrats have more seats in Congress and received a higher vote share in 2008 than in any time since the 1960s. Barack Obama was not yet age ten the last time Democrats were in a similar position in DC, and frankly, the years of conservative ascendancy, which kept the Democrats on the defensive and largely out of power, left an entire generation of politicians more used to challenging the power of others than wielding it themselves. And it has shown over the past 14 months.

This new day for Democrats - huge Congressional majorities, a country tempered by failed conservative policies, a significant Party ID advantage, and a powerful and growing majority coalition - is unlike any time we've seen in Washington in at least 40, if not 70 years. The Democrats have clearly needed time to learn how to be a governing party, to align their interests, manage complex legislation, bring along a lot of new staff, Senators, Members of the House, and a young President into a coherent team. It has been a bumpy process - no big surprise - but there are signs this week that this new 21st century Democratic Party is finding its way, learning how to manage the new circumstances, do what is required to move the nation forward.  It is learning how, after the end of the conservative ascendancy, to become a governing party.

In 2007, Peter Leyden and I wrote an article called The 50 Year Strategy, which argued that the failure of conservative politics and the emergence of a "new politics" of the 21st century offered the chance for the progressive movement to build a new and durable progressive era, and usher in a re-alignment in American politics.  I still believe, deeply, that this opportunity is very much present today. With strong leadership and the courage to tackle the nation's most important problems, it is still very much within the center-left's grasp. And in many ways this question - could the Democrats seize the historic opportunity they had to realign politics, and usher in a new era of reform and progress? - has been, and remains the single most important question in American politics today.  This morning, the chances of the Democrats seizing the moment - and the conservatives continuing to make equally historic political miscalculations - seems ever more possible.

Steven Pearlstein has a nice reflection on all this in the Washington Post this morning.

It may not be morning in America just yet, but today it certainly feels a lot more like spring - a time of hope and of possibility - for Washington and for the 21st century center-left.

Update: See our recent report on the changing coalitions of the two political parties to learn more about the current state of the Democratic Party's emerging majority coalition.

A new Telegraph (conservative) poll is the latest showing Tory slippages, Labour gains. If these numbers hold the election will end in a "hung Parliament," with no party able to form a government on their own (will talk more about this later). 

The general election is expected to start soon and wind up with election day on May 6th.  This election will be the first in British history to feature three televised debates, adding a wild card into this race which no one can predict.  The 3rd major British party, and 2nd left of center one, the Liberal Democrats, will be getting equal time to the big two in these debates, and no one really knows what that means.  So it is really a very fluid environment here.   

This spring general election is shaping up to be among the most competiive the UK has seen in many years.  And it also feels like a great deal could happen to tip this thing in a different direction, including towards an outright Labour victory.  

More soon. 

Great day wandering through London today.   Busy couple of days ahead. 

London - Am over in London to check in on the latest in politics here, and give some talks on American politics.  I will be offering up a few reports from here over the next few days, and will start with this one now:

- Recent polls show the Tory leader David Cameron dropping, and Labour leader Gordon Brown gaining.  With the general election campaign likely to start in the next few weeks, there is a growing chance that Labour might hold on and repel the Cameron and Tory assault of recent years.   This is going to be an incredible campaign, featuring among other things, the first set of televised debates between the major party candidates in British electoral history.  

- Excited that the White House held a series of meetings on immigration reform yesterday, and continue to show interest in moving it despite a very crowded agenda.  An upcoming march for immigration reform is forcing DC political leaders to not forget about the need to deal with our broken immigration system as soon as possible. 

One troubling rhetorical change we've picked up in recent months from some involved in this debate is the changing language around undocumented immigrants.  What we've all fought for in recent years is granting immediate legal status and a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, once they have paid a fine, gone to the back of the line, commit to learn English and undergo a background check.  But what we've seen from some leaders recently is an argument that we must offer a "change in status" to the undocumenteds, or to "legalize them," dropping the rhetorical commitment to citizenship.

Language matters in politics.  You need to say what you mean, and mean what you say.   If we are going to offer citizenship then it is better to say it, build the case for it, for if it is in the bill it is going to be vigerously debated.  And it is better to start the debate making the case for your ideas then somehow believing you can duck a tough part or part you don't like, or come to the proposal defensively late in the game.

Additionally, right now a set of strong voices are challenging the idea of keeping a provision of the old McCain-Kennedy bill which would allow for 200,000 visas a year for low-end workers.  The argument behind their opposition is that by creating a pool of "guest workers" we will be driving down wages of people at the low end of the workforce, and create a pool of workers capable of unfair exploitation.   Their argument is, essentially, that there should be no guest worker programs in the US, it is inconsistent with good economics and American values, and that this provision needs to be dropped from a final bill.

If I were among those who agreed with this argument then I would be very concerned that the strategic drop of the phrase "path to citizenship" is leaving open the possibility that the 11 mllion undocumenteds could during the course of the legislative compromises ahead become legal without citizenship, creating a guest worker pool of not 200,000 but 11 mlllion people. And for those who have fought hard for CIR for many years - as we at NDN have - the idea that there is rhetorical retreat on this core provision should be greeted with much greater outrage than it has.

Dropping the phrase "path to citizenship" is both bad politics and bad economics.  Advocates for reform will have to make their case to the American people why we want to do more than offer legalization.  The public will be with the reformers on this one, as polling data and coming sense dictate that the American people would never accept a guest worker program of 11 million people.  It is inconsistent with our values and terribly economics.  Those advocating for a path to citizenship are on very strong economic and political ground, and should not in any way retreat from this part of this important debate even before it has begun in earnest.

There simply is no constituency in America for a "path to legalization" and it should be rhetorically scrapped as soon as possible.

Will be talking about globalization, the internet and the need for America to raise its game at a very interesting forum this am hosted by the Joint Center.  Join us if you can.

At CPAC today, Ron Paul became the icing on an inedible cake.

While many have covered the recent rise of the right with all appropriate seriousness, there is a degree of farce in all this that would make many comedians proud.

I'm excited to be hosting a special event today, one which will take a very in-depth, expert look at how the British and American governments are embracing the open government movement.   We will be hearing from two old friends – Andrew McLaughlin, now Deputy Chief Technology Officer at the White House, and James Crabtree, formerly of NDN, now managing editor of the UK based magazine, Prospect, who is visiting us from London.

Behind this movement toward open data and open government is a clear sense that in the 21st century the world’s rising middle class, with higher levels of education, affluence, and connectedness, armed with greater access to information than ever before, will demand more openness, transparency, honesty and accountability from all their institutions, but particularly from government and their elected leaders.

These simple and reasonable demands of the world's rising middle class make it possible that the great ideological struggle of the 21st century will not be the same left-right struggle we saw play out in the 20th century, but one increasingly about open governments and societies versus ones more closed, more authoritarian, more statist.  Open, accessible governments, leaders and political parties will prosper in this new world of the 21st century.  Closed ones - China and Iran for example - will find the repression of their own people increasingly difficult as their people become more wired, connected and expectant of basic freedoms.  The transition of global politics from a more top-down broadcast model of societal communications to one that is more bottom up, and where people themselves increasingly have power, is one of the great global events of this new century. 

So while this conversation today may sound a bit geeky – and it probably will be – it is really about something much bigger, more profound, and at the very center of the most important discussions just beginning to break out across the world today. 

So join us if you can, live online, or in the NDN offices at noon.  It is going to be a good one.

An Alex Bolton Hill story today has the following passage:

But Simon Rosenberg...argued Democrats are still well-positioned compared to Republicans for the upcoming election because they have tried to address the nation’s major problems, even if they’ve fallen short.

“They’re frustrated but they need to look inward,” he said, calling for better communication among Democratic leaders. “They have to find a way to work more effectively to do the people’s business. There’s going to have to be much tighter coordination on major legislation among the White House, Senate and House.”

I get asked all the time - so what should the Democrats do? Three things I answer:

- Convince the American People They Have an Economic Plan, and Have One

- Embrace The New Electoral Coalition Built by Obama 2008

- Become a Governing Party

If they can do those three things this year I think the Democrats will be fine.  If they can't, then the door will be open for significant Republican gains. 

More on all this soon.  A little busy today.

It's been a very productive last few months here at NDN/NPI.  While I've been hunkered down here at home today due to the great winter storm of 2010, I've had a chance to reflect upon our work of late, and am most pleased not only at the real world impact we are having, but in the way so many different voices here are contributing and making a difference.  Some examples:

Creating New Jobs Through A Payroll Tax Cut - Aggressively promoted by Rob Shapiro starting last fall, this idea is becoming central to the discussion of a new "jobs" bill.  You can find video here of Rob promoting the idea at the White House's Job Summit last December. 

Global Mobile - Sam DuPont, the author of our GlobalMobile column, has become the most widely read writer on the NDN blog.  His work is gaining greater media attention too.  Just yesterday he was on New Hampshire Public Radio talking about mobile banking and the highly successful text "Haiti" campaign.

Electricity 2.0 - Last week Michael Moynihan released a ground-breaking new paper advocating for the need for Electricity 2.0, the complete reimagining and rebuilding of our electricity system.   He had an op-ed on the subject in the San Francisco Chronicle last week, and was also featured in the Washington Post on Monday. 

"The Lost Decade" - A few months ago NDN made a decision to try to popularize the phrase "lost decade" to describe the state of the middle class in the decade that just past.  This effort was lead by Jake Berliner, who authored a compelling paper, A Lost Decade for Everyday Americans, on December 17th which was widely circulated on the Hill and around DC.  This phrase, which was not commonly in use, has now become commonplace in our public debate, led, most notably, by President Obama himself.  

Alicia Menendez - Our new senior advisor has been all over cable TV news these last few weeks, talking about everything from the Tea Partiers to next steps on health care reform.  She is a great addition to our already strong team.  Watch for her on national TV, and increasingly on our site and blog.

Andres Ramirez - Is increasingly seen as one of America's leading experts on the emerging Latino vote, immigration reform, the census and other issues relating to the growing political power of Hispanics in America.  This weekend he was featured in a major Las Vegas Sun article on the Latino vote in Nevada. 

Winograd and Hais - Our two LA-based fellows, Morley Winograd and Mike Hais, continue to produce high quality regular analysis of American politics today.  Mike's two recent "Use It or Lose It" essays are some of the best analyses I've seen of late about the changing American electorate. 

This is of course just a quick sketch of how the talented and diverse NDN/NPI team is offering innovative ideas, breaking through in the national media and impacting the national debate.  I am proud of how during this time of great national challenge our team is stepping up and doing what they can to steer our nation towards a better day.

And yes I am ready to ship all our weather and snow back up to Vancouver.

Update: Please help us add to this great team by letting interested candidates know about 3 new job and 6 summmer intern openings at NDN/NPI.  We will closing the window for many of these open positions next week.  Thanks.

In his press conference yesterday the President talked about this goals in reforming our health care system which demonstrated a clear evolution of thinking and narrative.  Take a look:

During our meeting we also touched briefly on how we can move forward on health reform.  I've already announced that in two weeks I'll be holding a meeting with people from both parties, and as I told the congressional leadership, I'm looking forward to a constructive debate with plans that need to be measured against this test.  Does it bring down costs for all Americans as well as for the federal government, which spends a huge amount on health care?  Does it provide adequate protection against abuses by the insurance industry?  Does it make coverage affordable and available to the tens of millions of working Americans who don't have it right now?  And does it help us get on a path of fiscal sustainability?

What is encouraging about this langauge is that as NDN has suggested for some time the true test of any proposed health care reform is whether it can get costs down over time while maintaining quality and accelerating innovation.  It makes sense that to achieve another important goal - creating universal coverage - that one must first figure out how to make the system less expensive.  For as President Obama said repeatedly during the 2008 campaign, people do not have health insurance today because of its high cost.  Creating a more competitive, intelligent, effecient, less expensive and patient-driven system needs to be the primary goal of health care reform, and there is no way to do this without sacrificing one of the other stated goals of the 2009 debate - making sure everyone can keep what they have. 

My own take is that the adoption of that rhetorical goal - letting everyone keep what they have - was a critical moment in driving health care reform off the political rails.   For how can one have "reform" if everyone gets to keep what you already have? Where is the reform in that? And if your basic argument is that the system is terribly broken, and needs to be fixed - in fact it is an urgent national priority - then how can you then say but you, the American people, get to stay in the old broken system and not join the effort to reform?

In fact what is required for true reform and the construction of a 21st century health care system in the US is for everyone to in fact leave behind the current, inadequate system and move to a better system.  Rhetorically the President needs to tell those who are satisfied with their insurance today that in fact the new system will actually not allow them to keep what they have, but will offer them something fundamentally better (the idea you get to keep what you have was also dramatically undermined by the idea of the excise tax on "cadillac plans").

As the President's language suggests above, he is rhetorically and intellectually moving beyond the theory of the bills which passed in 2009.  I am not sure how this evolution of the President's thinking will effect what happens with health reform in 2010, but the tests the President offered yesterday are the right tests which all reform must be measured.  At the core of this new pitch must be that the new system will be better for everyone, and that everyone has a stake in making it happen.

With the new storm coming tonight, and the poor state of things which already exists, my guess is that DC and our political/governmental ecosystem here shuts down for the rest of the week. 

With horrendeous conditions now potentially worsening and dragging on through the weekend, DC could start experiencing humanitarian challenges, particularly with people of limited mobility getting enough food to eat. I think it is just a matter of time before the National Guard is called in to help clear streets, remove the snow, help get food to those who cannot leave their homes and help get the government of the United States back up and operating again.

People have asked me why this has been so hard for DC.  And as my wife Caitlin explained to me last night the infrastructure here was prepared to handle six inches of snow, or maybe even a foot.  But two feet is a task of whole other order of magnitude, and DC's equipment and workers are buckling under this once-in-a-century weather event.  The snow tonight will add to the misery, crippling this city and America's government even more than it has.

As for NDN we are open today but the DC office will likely close for the rest of the week.  We will be working remotely, but don't expect the same level of intensity as one normally feels from us. 

And yes we are cancelling our event this Thursday with the Panamanian Ambassador.  We will announce a new date soon. 

For all our DC friends, good luck staying healthy, safe and productive this week.