Some of the most prominent names in progressive politics launched a major new organization on Thursday dedicated to pinpointing and aiding primary challenges against incumbent Democrats who are viewed as acting against their constituents' interests.
Accountability Now PAC will officially be based in Washington D.C., though its influence is designed to be felt in congressional districts across the country. The group will adopt an aggressive approach to pushing the Democratic Party in a progressive direction; it will actively target, raise funds, poll and campaign for primary challengers to members who are either ethically or politically out-of-touch with their voters. The goal, officials with the organization say, is to start with 25 potential races and dwindle it down to eight or 10; ultimately spending hundreds of thousands on elections that usually wouldn't be touched.
The devil is really in the details in these types of efforts. I'm a supporter if its done smartly and strategically. If you're a Democrat with a center to center-right voting record and you represent a left of center district then its important that you feel the heat from your left. I think these kinds of efforts, if targetted correctly, are needed in order to move policy to the left.
Seth at Enik Rising though seems to disagree with this strategy,
The philosophy of this PAC is that members of Congress are not representing their constituents well. This is half right. Most members of Congress deviate from their constituents, but in the more extreme direction, not the more moderate one... There are plenty of moderate congressional districts and states. Moderate members of Congress are an endangered species.
My question for Seth is simply, does he believe that moderates are, by their nature, objectively better for public policy than more extreme office holders? Is there evidence that he can point to that demonstrates improved public policy outcomes with an increase in moderate office holders? If there's not evidence of this then I have to question Seth's implied assertion that moderates are always to be the preferred office holders.
Maybe it's just that Seth is an academic and I'm more of an activist that we see this differently but to me smartly targeting moderates who are not representing their liberal districts will help advance progressive causes. That to me is the ultimate end game.
1 comment:
Sorry for not responding sooner. I certainly didn't mean to imply that moderates are somehow better than ideologues. Actually, I think quite the opposite is true. Ideologues can advocate for something coherent. If it's put into effect, the public can judge it. If they don't like it, they can get something very different by putting the opposition party in power.
My point was that I thought the folks at AccountabilityNow were mischaracterizing representation in the United States. Members of Congress tend to be more extreme than their constituents, not more moderate. But if they want to find the moderates and purge them anyway, they'll get no complaint from me.
Post a Comment