What do these two eastern U.S. governors have in common? Republican John Kasich of Ohio and Democrat Andrew Cuomo of New York have both observed in national broadcasts (Kasich on ABC with George Stephanopoulos and Cuomo on MSNBC with Chris Hayes) that the Democratic party has no positive agenda and no message. Here's my solution- if only someone running for office will pay attention. Otherwise, Democrats may well once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as they so often have before.
THIS LETTER, addressed to both House and Senate Candidates, including incumbents, is being mailed out to every Democrat running for Congress this year:
The Honorable &&&
Member, House of Representatives/ United States Senate
Washington, DC 20515
RE: The Democratic Party, the 2018 midterm elections
Dear Congressman/Senator/candidate/Committee &&&:
I am writing this letter in the hopes that some of the suggestions contained in it will assist the Democratic Party in retaking the House and Senate in the 2018 mid term elections. I very much realize I have no “cachet,” but I would also hope that you would recognize good ideas on their merits and take advantage of them. I’ll start with this observation: It's an ugly truth that is also no secret, and I heard it most recently from the Governor of Ohio, Republican John Kasich, on ABC's This Week on February 25, 2018:
"Let me tell you something about Democrats: I have no clue what they stand for."
If you have any doubt that his statement is true of the general population, then the next time you go home, stop 10 random strangers and ask them one simple question: "Putting aside for the moment what the Democratic Party opposes, what does the Party stand for?"
In the 2018 mid term elections, we can not allow the opposition to define us as we have in prior losing campaigns when we refused to come forward with a positive platform that was effectively communicated to the voters. That is one of the main reasons why, in spite of every numerical, ideological, and moral advantage the Party has, it has managed too often managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In 2010, it was running away from the Affordable Care Act (ACA) instead of running on the most popular parts in it, such as the prohibitions on insurance companies denying coverage for pre-existing conditions, the ban on life time caps, and extending coverage of children through age 26. Democrats then lost both houses of Congress.
Seven years later when repeal of the ACA was on the table in Congress, that same Act proved to be more popular- once voters knew what was actually in it and what it did- than Democratic incumbents themselves had ever believed. In 2016 the lack of information about a simple platform that Democrats would try to legislate if elected cost the presidency and both houses of Congress, as too many voters felt they knew what they were getting with Donald Trump or else believed the lies about what they would be getting with Hillary Clinton. Ms. Clinton, unlike Bernie Sanders who stood for health care as a right and free college tuition, never made positive points the centerpiece of her campaign. She let the opponent define her and her positions, and suffered accordingly.
So here is my challenge to the Party: come up with a platform. It needs to be short, simple, effective, and based on proposals that Republicans will automatically oppose or else risk alienating their base. This agenda should be a list of things that every Democrat running for office or in office stands for and promises to do his or her best to enact into legislation if the party regains control of any or all branches of the government. And every voter should know what they are.
We have to come up with three (that's the magic number, as every accomplished public speaker knows) simple, large, doable ideas, each of which has the following characteristics: they are popular; they are easy to understand; they can be quickly and easily accomplished (so putting a colony on Mars isn't going to be on the list); they will make this a better country and help people; they can be put in a 15 second campaign commercial. And they all have to be things that will put Republican opponents in a straitjacket: damned by their rabid base if they accept them, and damned by voters in a general election if they oppose them.
Here are my best ideas. Feel free to borrow, modify, or ignore them- but if you ignore them, you've got to come up with something just as good:
(1) FULL EMPLOYMENT:
Democrats need only propose a Full Employment for all Americans Act. This law would guarantee (see the 1993 Kevin Kline movie "Dave") that any person who wants to work, can work, at a livable hourly wage rate which would be significantly higher than the current minimum wage. The jobs would be public works or public service type jobs. This Act would also include provisions for retraining and re-educating people who have lost jobs due to off shoring, robotics, downsizing, and environmental policies, and paying them a living wage while they are in school. It would include separate provisions that would provide a job for any person who lost his or her position to an illegal immigrant- but at twice the annual salary or wage (this would come from a fund from employers' fines who have illegally employed illegal immigrants). In one fell swoop, the current batch of xenophobic, nationalist oriented Americans (the flyover people, or Trump's base) would be converted from hostility and irrational fear of illegal immigrants to feeling like they've won the lottery if they can point to a job they lost to an illegal immigrant. Providing a cash bounty (say $10,000 or more to any American displaced by an illegal immigrant) would increase the lottery winner feeling.
This is a two for one. The Republicans manage to say the word "jobs" in connection with every proposal that they endorse (tax cuts for billionaires and corporations!) or everything they opposed that Democrats support (remember the phrase "the job killing Obamacare?") If they oppose DACA, illegal immigration, or legal immigration, they pound on two things: public safety and jobs. If they claim that tax cuts for the super wealthy are a good thing, it's because they claim some of the money will "trickle down" in the form of job creation by corporations ever so grateful that they are saving billions in taxes.
I say this is a "two for one" because full employment would make this a better country, improve the lives of the unemployed, and rip away the biggest reason that Trump won the middle American states (Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, West Virginia) that he did in 2016. Actually, this proposal is a three for one, as full employment would decrease crime as well.
(2) COMPLETE ACCESS TO HEALTH INSURANCE: Three words: "Medicare for All." We don't have to start out by subsidizing Medicare for everyone under 65, but we can certainly have a revenue neutral law that allows any person under 65 to buy into Medicare at the incremental cost. Immediately this does away with numerous faux arguments of Republicans, including how Obamacare (the ACA) is "failing" because premiums are going up, or that health insurance is unavailable in many rural areas. Another plus: with this proposal, there will be no reason to reinstitute the mandate which was repealed in the 2017 tax bill. That mandate existed for one reason- to make the law palatable to insurance companies by providing them with a profit motive to continuing selling health insurance. Allowing Medicare for All (the public option) means that private companies can continue selling insurance if they want to, and it will also mean that they will have to compete with the lower cost (much lower administrative overhead) of Medicare. Eventually, Americans under 65 will be subsidized as are Americans over 65, but this can be done gradually over time.
Coupled with this will be some medical cost cutting measures- my favorite is a complete elimination of the need for medical providers to have malpractice insurance by creating a no-fault program to compensate any person injured in any medical procedure or by any legally taken drug If nothing else, this proposal would turn a heretofore rock solid Republican constituency (physicians, pharmaceutical companies, major hospital holding corporations) into fans of the Democratic Party. More importantly, this is one of the major pieces of low hanging fruit to knock down overall medical costs. (I've written extensively on this idea before; one article appeared in Atlanta's Fulton County Daily Report in 2004. The physicians who heard me speak about it during a 2004 Senate campaign were very enthusiastic.)
(3) TIE A TAX THE REPUBLICANS WANT TO GET RID OF TO A PROGRAM THEIR SUPPORTERS WOULD LOVE
TAKE THE ESTATE TAX AND USE 100% OF THE PROCEEDS FOR WOUNDED VETERANS AND THEIR FAMILIES: The act will be "DISABLED VETERANS' FAMILIES COLLEGE AND HEALTH CARE BENEFITS ACT." I'd love to see any Republican candidate argue against taxing money from dead billionaires- the operative words being "dead" and “billionaires”- and giving it to help support wounded veterans and their families. Put every child and spouse of every disabled veteran through college for free. Provide free health insurance for every child and every spouse of every disabled veteran, for life. This is one so obvious that it needs no further explanation. Every time the Republicans use their euphemism "death tax" the Democrats need only counter with "dead billionaires" helping children and spouses of disabled veterans. The picture paints itself.
*****
CAMPAIGN ADS:
There needs to be a nationally coordinated ad campaign that makes clear that this election is about one thing: putting into place elected officials who will be a check on Donald Trump, and not his cheerleaders and enablers. A smart ad campaign- feel free to borrow writers from Colbert's Late Night show and The Daily Show- can pack far more emotional punch than any number of brilliant and effective policy initiatives. Make Trump's own words the anchor around Republican candidates' campaigns. Use video of the worst of Trump (the pussy grabbing comments, the mocking of disabled person, encouraging violence at his rallies, his overt and easily disprovable lies) and juxtapose persons who are inherently likable and trustworthy. Every state, every community has at least one or two very notable, well liked, persons. Michael Jordan in Chicago. Lebron James in Cleveland. Tom Hanks everywhere. Have an athlete appear alongside of video of Trump saying that "grabbing women by the pussy" is "locker room talk" and have that athlete- a Dwayne Johnson (former Miami football player), a Derek Jeter, and so forth, simply say: "that language was never used in any locker room I've ever been in, and if anybody had talked that way, we would have shut that person down in an instant. We're talking about women- my mother, my sisters, my daughters- and we don't allow anyone to talk about them that way."
I'm not an ad man or a professional campaign adviser. But I know what works for me and for most people: ads that feature real human beings, obviously sincere, and real anecdotal stories. There's no limit to the possibilities, and have a nationally coordinated ad campaign that links every local Republican to Donald Trump (they'll either have to repudiate him or explain how they can possibly support him). And tailor every ad to local races by using people that constituency knows and trusts, even if it's local high school or college athletes or celebrities (like country music singer Luke Bryan from Leesburg, Georgia, or Herschel Walker, Georgia's all time favorite football player).
Thank you for your time and your attention. If anyone desires to contact me, I’m available pretty much anytime (when I’m not in a courtroom) if you want to discuss this further....
If you want to know who I am or why I do what I do, you can go to a blog my campaign manager suggested I create in the Fall of 2004 (after a losing but spirited campaign) at http://buildabettermousetrap.blogspot.com/, or you can ask Georgia Congressman Sanford Bishop. I'm sure Sanford will be happy to share.
Thank you for your time and your attention.
