Winter 1996 - Issue Number 38
by Al Fishman,
Member Peace Action National Board
How do progressive movement activists participate in an electoral system that is driven by money, television sound-bytes, attack ads, spin doctors, and the shunning of honest debate about critical issues?
Progressive supporters &emdash; even with support from big name entertainers -- cannot compete with the "Contract On America" type supporters in raising and giving money. (It should be noted, for example, that business out spent labor in this last election by a seven to one margin.)
Many of us have also tried working within campaign structures (even paying for "our" organizer working in a favored candidate's campaign organization) only to find that the campaign organization marginalizes -- maybe even ignores -- our concerns on issues.
Peace Action, the largest grass roots peace organization in the United States, with 60,000 members in 27 states, was deeply concerned. There have been few Congresses more hostile to peace, disarmament and social justice issues that the 104th. In particular, the military budget -- far from being considered for cuts -- actually had extra money thrown at it for pork-barrel projects while domestic spending was slashed left and right. In the 1996 federal elections, Peace Action found a way to participate.
Peace Voter 96, the first real nationally coordinated campaign of Peace Action since the "Freeze" referenda campaigns in the early 80's, provided a real opportunity to work in a principled and effective way. We targeted 35 House and Senate races, based on where we felt we could make a contribution to actually affecting the politics of the 105th Congress. The campaign included the distribution of more than a million Voter Guides, sponsoring or attending candidate forums, bird-dogging candidates, and in several other ways forcing the peace and justice issues to the forefront of the contest. The Voter Guides - the centerpiece of the campaign - published candidate positions on issues we selected. We used voting records, responses to questionnaires, position papers and other public statements.
The ultra-right (so-called) "Christian Coalition" popularized the Voter Guide concept and has distributed millions of copies supported by a mega-bucks budget. In our case, we adhered to IRS regulations by not using tax deductible contributions for this work. And we also adhered to Federal Election laws by not coordinating our efforts with those of candidates with better records or positions on our program. On the positive side this non-partisan, issue oriented approach energized volunteers who might not have been motivated by more traditional methods; and we were able to present our message to many voters who are turned off to traditional politicking.
Nationally, of the 35 House and Senate seats targeted by Peace Voter '96, the candidate more receptive to Peace Action positions on the military budget and federal spending priorities won in 18 races, including, in Michigan, the Levin vs. Romney race for the Senate, the Stabenow vs. Chrysler race in the 8th Congressional District, and the Rivers vs. Fitzsimmons race in the 13th Congressional District. And some of the most intensive Peace Voter 96 work was done in 9 House districts where "Contract On America" supporting freshmen were defeated, including the defeat of Dick Chrysler in Michigan.
We are under no illusion that peace issues were the decisive ones in these races. We are quite sure, however, that our effort was part of the mobilization of the core peace and justice constituency -- as part of a larger liberal/progressive base including labor, environmental, human rights and other citizen's groups -- which provided the decisive margin in many races.
We will be laying the groundwork in 1997 for an even bigger and better Peace Voter '98.
Return to the Index of Synapse 38, Winter 1996