I'm having a hard time deciding which organizations should get my money this year. Of course, I'll be renewing my CSCC membership for $20 because I want to see this local effort at grass roots communication and organization continue, but what else?
I stopped by the Brasserie Louis as the Obama party was winding down last night. I was struck by how many new faces were in the crowd of about 30--and these were young faces. That got me thinking about the Obama movement and what comes next. It seems clear that the Obama organization is going to remain together in some form. I expect that they will be soliciting contributions for their organization before too long. I've already received a mailing from DFA (Democracy for America, Howard Dean's old outfit, now run by his brother Jim) and an email from MoveOn today asking for $15 per month (now that's aggressive). When I get time I'm going to log into change.org to vote in the poll they have going on, and I can expect a request for a contribution after that. About a year ago I contributed to the Nature Conservancy, so I've been getting a weekly request of some kind from them.
So here's what I'm wondering: how do we measure whether any of this is doing any good? I think MoveOn is making a difference, but do I know? Is it better to give a larger amount to one organization or small amounts to several different efforts? What about the national Democratic party (now run by Tim Kaine) or the DCCC or the local UCDC?
So here's my thought: the group that I can see is able to leverage a small amount of money into a big impact is going to be most likely to get a contribution from me this year. Frankly, after all the campaigns and efforts of the past year, there's not a lot of excess money to give.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
This is a great topic! I've definitely got some thoughts and questions on the matter, and I will try to write them up here later tonight.
Here's a comment off the PAforDemocracy list from Joy S. in announcing that Common Cause was holding a meeting to try to start a chapter in Pittsburgh:
My political commitment has to be first and foremost, DFA...Plus
Sierra Club & our very fine LBGT groups (Stonewall Dems and Gertrude
Stein) & occasional MoveOn & PA-LYV & ACORN & Northside United (etc)
events.
But I wish Common Cause well, and hope you'll turn out for them.
__________
Even within this short comment you can see the problem I'm trying to get at: so many different organizations with different missions, drawing on a finite number of people and resources. The secret of politics is drawing in new people. That's what Obama did, it's what Howard Dean did, it's what MoveOn has done. But now it feels like MoveOn has become too big and that the "movement" in the political system will have to come from elsewhere. The PickensPlan, for all its faults, has a pretty sophisticated grassroots operation going on (tracking each Congressional district's members, the position of each rep and senator on the plan itself, and keeping a running count of letters to the editor published in each district). But that's one issue framed from the point of view of T. Boone Pickens. It might be part of reaching a tipping point on energy policy, but not on a progressive agenda.
I have incredible respect for the people who grind away in the policy trenches, but that's not the role I'm playing as a citizen with a few hundred dollars per year to try to make some difference. In the end, I tend toward an intuitive approach to political engagement. But here's my question: has someone figured out a better approach? What do we really know about how to make things happen from the grassroots?
Post a Comment