Who needs em?
by digby
So the Firefighters Union is giving up on national politics and is putting their money elsewhere. It seems they don’t feel their money has been well spent since they don’t appear to have any allies in Washington. Well played, Democrats. Rick Perlstein addressed this problem in a piece in the NY Daily News a week or so ago:
You’ve seen them: Ordinary white Americans from Wisconsin or Indiana, protest signs aimed at treasonous politicians.
No, not the Tea Partyers, though that description fits them, too. I write of the ones on the left, the thousands petitioning their governors against budget cuts and the slashing of union rights.
But while John Boehner has declared “no daylight” between himself and the Tea Party, one wag joked that President Obama had more to say about whether the Chicago Bears would get into the Super Bowl than the union protests in Wisconsin.
His silence has liberals baffled. The Wisconsin protesters’ demands – a focus on jobs; preservation of collective bargaining; resistance to cuts in social services – poll well among the general public. So why are Democrats leaving this political energy on the table?
Excellent question. I think the only logical answer is that they don’t agree with it.
Meanwhile, here’s an in-depth look at just who is funding the anti-union crusade that seems to have come out of nowhere:
Behind the onslaught is a well-funded network of conservative think tanks that you’ve probably never heard of. Conceived by the same conservative ideologues who helped found the Heritage Foundation, the State Policy Network (SPN) is a little-known umbrella group with deep ties to the national conservative movement. Its mission is simple: to back a constellation of state-level think tanks loosely modeled after Heritage that promote free-market principles and rail against unions, regulation, and tax increases. By blasting out policy recommendations and shaping lawmakers’ positions through briefings and private meetings, these think tanks cultivate cozy relationships with GOP politicians. And there’s a long tradition of revolving door relationships between SPN staffers and state governments. While they bill themselves as independent think tanks, SPN’s members frequently gather to swap ideas. “We’re all comrades in arms,” the network’s board chairman told the National Review in 2007.
As Perlstein points out, grassroots movements have historically been great resources for presidents who sought to be “transformational.” In fact, there’s a case to be made that it can’t happen without them. But then I suppose it depends on what kind of transformation you seek to make. If the vision is to further the interests of business, then going where the real money is makes sense. Besides, we’re into ersatz movements these days. The real thing can get messy. And expensive.
.