(Lots of good points here. – promoted by eli_beckerman)

Tax reform gets a hearing in Western Mass.

The above is about a forum recently held in Western Mass concerning the budget and options to increase revenue.  I think many people have gotten up to date on the “Act to Invest in our Communities” which is basically a weaker version of the tax fairness proposals Nat, Jill, Scott, Rick, Mark, and the GRP promoted and argued for during the 2010 elections and before.  More on the legislation here.

There are a few points I want to make in regard to the strategy outlined in that article, and I know other have made these points before and perhaps more strongly.

1) There are a number of legislators who do introduce or co-sponsor legislation that the GRP supports or is generally in line with what we promote.  However most of this legislation sits idly, is not publicly promoted by its co-sponsors, and/or when approaching passage gets watered down and loses any edge it had.

2) Both houses of the State Legislature are over 80% Democratic.  Democrats have held majorities in both chambers since 1958.  During most election cycles the majority of legislators go without challengers in both the primary and general elections.

3) Legislators in the example above, and in many other instances, will often talk about the need for advocates of a particular bill to do public education on the issue and expanding their advocacy to more communities and organizations.

This is not a bad idea in and of itself.  Popular participation is something to expand, not limit.  However, it has to be put in context. Most of the legislation the Massachusetts Legislature passes is not subject to public education or broad campaigns to involve the residents of Massachusetts.  Most of it is handled as an inside affair with little public awareness or oversight (the state legislature is not even subject to the Open Meetings law!).

Why can’t the Act to Invest in Our Communities get pushed through like the rest?  Even if it were unpopular (many polls show people would rather increase taxes on the better off than cut public services) why can’t they just shove it through anyway (80% remember), they pass unpopular and dumb legislation all the time.  Its not like they will get challenged in a primary or in the general election and they did survive passing a regressive tax increase (sales tax).

4) You cannot blame the Republicans or the threat of Republican takeover.  Its been 53 years of uninterrupted Democratic majorities.  Republicans have only held between 5% and 25% of the seats in either chamber over the last 25 years.  In the 2010 election cycle they added about 15 seats in the House, an historically great performance on their part, but they still only control 20% of the chamber.  Perhaps the vast majority of Democratic legislators fear a Republican challenger, but its a phantom fear.

5) Whose fault then?  You could point to the House Speaker, because of the power he holds in his chamber.  But there is no reason that House Democrats could not criticize him publicly, vote down his proposals, or form a bloc to get rid of him.  And with the Senate President the same argument can be made.

6) If I had to venture a guess at what the real problem is, its the political assumptions and culture that have set in after 53 years of Democratic control.  The Democratic Party and its membership do not hold their own politicians accountable to their platform or guiding principles in Massachusetts.  Whether you are progressive, centrist, or conservative, what matters is protecting the lesser of one evil in spite of the policies it is enacting.  Most progressive advocacy groups, even PACs like Mass Alliance that exist to elect “progressives”, refuse to mount primary or general election challenges to incumbent Democrats.  Its rude to practice democracy.

7)  The Green-Rainbow Party has to practice sustainable rudeness.  Rude because democracy is itself messy and those with power are not just being rude but are being downright a-holes, and sustainable in both the sense of  being endurable and the sense reasonableness and credibility .  Because rudeness absent a power building strategy, popular alternatives, and a reality principle will net us jack and allow the downright stupid but money backed alternatives to take advantage.

The GRP needs to challenge Democrats who have yet to arrange their exit with a lobbyist job or patronage hire.  It needs to demand that those calling themselves progressives in the legislature do a more than sit on legislation, vote lock step with the party leadership, and give cover to a political party that is not working for people’s best interests.  And the argument for this credible impoliteness needs to be made clear to those in our own party.

We cannot impeach the president or 99 times out of 100 take Scott Brown’s Senate seat.  We do not yet have the power in numbers, resources, or collective experience and expertise to deliver these feats.  But we sure as hell can win a State Representative seat, press a few legislators into voting for half-decent legislation with the threat of electoral challenge, or win local races that will put heat on the pols higher up.  And while this will not solve the economic or ecological crisis it will create the political conditions where people will join us and listen to the varied critiques and perspectives that as plural movement we represent.