Backpacks Speaking Politics - Wake Forest University

From November 28th through November 30th, several members of Democracy Matters as well as personal friends of Jessie Vogel (one of our members) wore 10 different backpacks around campus. Each backpack illustrated a different political issue, from stem cell research to gay marriage to the war in Iraq. There were conservative and liberal issues represented, and the backpacks themselves did not support one side of an issue over another. The idea behind the project was to connect the quintessential image of a student, the backpack, to the many issues that students are passionate about. The project was designed to remind people that students today care about many issues, and that we are not as apathetic as many cynics say we are. Furthermore, the backpacks were all connected by Democracy Matters. Although many students have strong beliefs about the environment, health care, or the death penalty, under the current political system, students are powerless. The backpacks were intended to be a way to start discussions among those wearing them and other students about the need for change.

In this way, the purpose of the project was two-fold. It was designed to illustrate particular issues and encourage thought and dialogue about these issues; it was also designed to educate people about Democracy Matters and the need for campaign finance reform.

For three days, I wore a backpack around campus. I wore the Environment backpack for the first day, and then I wore the Immigration Reform backpack over the final two days. In addition to the backpacks, everybody also wore a blue hat with a red star on it to connect all those participating together. Wearing the backpack was an interesting experience. Many people asked questions about it, and I was able to discuss it for a few minutes in three of my classes (none of which relate to politics, sociology, or a similar area). Most people that I talked to were curious about what the backpack was and why I was wearing it. Many of them wanted to know what the purpose of the project was, and while I rarely got to discuss the particular issue (people were generally fairly set on their opinions), I was able to talk about bigger issues.

The project concluded on Friday, and the backpacks all being displayed in the library. They are in a high-traffic area, so even though nobody is wearing them around campus, they will still be seen by a lot of people. I had previously mentioned that the backpacks were going to be displayed with a video discussing the project, but as far as I'm aware, this is no longer the case. The library moved the display area, and it's now in a point where an audible video would be inappropriate. At the moment, I don't know of any plans to still have the video, but that could change.

Finally, the project got a lot of good press. Unfortunately, in most cases, the reporters were more interested in the artistic side of the project, so Democracy Matters is not central in any articles. The project was also featured in two TV news stories, and in at least one of these, they did include Jessie talking about Democracy Matters and its goals. (I was unable to watch the other bit.) The Winston-Salem Journal ran a piece on the project that appeared on the front of local section and included several full color pictures (the online version is here). Also, the Window on Wake Forest, the Wake Forest news service, ran a piece on it that appeared on the Wake Forest home page (the article is here). A photo gallery of the project can be found underneath the picture in the Wake article.

Benn Stancil
Democracy Matters Campus Coordinator
Wake Forest University, NC

Art and Democracy - University of Minnesota

We produced this event to unite the worlds of social justice action and art on campus, build coalitions, and increase awareness of Democracy Matters on campus. We partnered with Substance and the Arts Quarter Collective. The venue was the Steak Knife, a small restaurant off campus with a small stage which brought the social justice scene to the night life scene of Dinkytown. We had students come in and out all night and we counted 150 heads at one point. Because there was no cover, students stopped by to check out the art and grab some good food and beer and listen to some of the music before heading out to other venues nearby. Our visibility also attracted people off the streets to come check it out. There is no way we would have reached as many people with an on-campus location.

One of the highlights of the nights actually started off as a disaster when a mic broke and a group of actors had no room on stage to perform a piece about the hunger struggle in America. They decided to move the play out to the parking lot and the audience followed them out. It was cold, but the performance was so moving it didn’t matter. The fact that it was a play about homelessness and hunger and it was performed in a parking lot added an element of ironic reality.

The planning of this event was difficult because we had no experience putting on an art show. We learned a lot and formed a new coalition with a student art group on campus that helped us with artistic direction. We had some no-shows for artwork and problems with getting funding for an event at a venue that serves alcohol but it was worth it in the end because we reached a new audience.

Sarah Emmel

Democracy Matters Campus Coordinator

University of Minnesota

NEC College Convention in New Hampshire

On November 27th - 30th I had the pleasure of attending the NEC College Convention in New Hampshire. Every presidential election year, college students gather in large numbers to learn more about the issues that are being discussed during the campaigns and to meet the candidates directly. Unfortunately, this year because of they way the primaries were scheduled, the convention had to take place during the month of November as opposed to in January, when it has traditionally taken place. As a result, there were not as many students and colleges as they would have liked. After all, this is the prime exam and final paper period for college students so I am sure that it was very hard for most people to make the trip.

Even though the numbers were low, I was still able to meet a lot of great people, some of the presidential candidates, attend some issue specific workshop, and help lead some workshops. On Wednesday, I manned a table at the Opportunity Fair, where I spoke with about twenty people, most of whom were in high school. After giving them the rundown on Democracy Matters and the money in politics issue, some of them even signed form letters to their senators asking them to support the Fair Elections Now Act. I was able to get 11 people in all to send letters.

The first workshop that I helped lead was called, "Student Organizing on Campuses," and I co-facilitated it with Maya Enista from mobilize.org and Ian Storrar from Common Cause. We had a great discussion with the 15 or so students who attended. We talked about there responses to the following two questions: 1. How frustrated are young people (15-30) about political issues that affect their lives (education, environment, health care, civil rights, the War in Iraq, etc.)? and 2. How political active and engaged are young people (15-30)? The interesting thing about these responses is the disconnect that was apparent. Essentially, students feel like their peers are frustrated and care a lot about a variety of issue but at the same time feel like they are not politically active. In an ideal world your level of political engagement would match your level of concern about specific issues. We talked about how the reason for this disconnect is the fact that money in politics makes our democracy an unfair process and turns people cynical. Until we address the money in politics issue, people will continually feel cynical and turned away by their own government. The students at the end felt like this was the best workshop they had attended during the convention. Sometimes people just want to share their own experiences and the learning comes from that.

The other workshop I helped out with was, "Public Financing of Campaigns: How Students Can Bring About Change." This was moderated by Dan Week from Just6Dollars.org. There were a lot of people on the panel. Not too many people attended this one, unfortunately, due to a dead time during the day. We did get a few people to sign and send some form letter though.

I attended two workshops: one was about forgiven foreign debt and the other was about health care. The foreign debt one was facilitated by two poeple from Jubilee USA Network, which is advocated for all foreign debt to be forgiven to the 67 most highly indebted developing countries. The other workshop was facilitated by New Hampshire for Health Care. The interesting bit of information I learned from this workshop is that the largest and fastest growing population on uninsured people are between the ages of 19-24.

Finally, I was able to ask some of the presidential candidates and/or the representatives questions about money in politics and the Fair Elections Now Act. First, I asked Joe Biden the following question: "Senator Biden, your life story is a testament to the fact that young people do care about a variety of political issues and that they can look to public service as a way to affect change, but a lot has change since you first won a senate seat at the age of 29. Young pepple look at policy that just doesn't make sense anymore: an expensive and deadly war that gives away billions of contracts to private firms like Halliburton and Blackwater, billions of dollars of farm subsidies that go to large corporate agribusinesses instead of family farms, and our efforts to bring about sound environmental policy is constantly being stonewalled by the big oil and gas industries. The one thing that ties all these things together is money in politics. How has the issue of money in politics changed since during your time in office and what are you doing to bring about a system of full public financing so we can make get big money out of politics?" The first words out of his mouth were, "This is the single most important issue you can focus on because, as you said, it affects everything that is done in Congress. Don't expect any significant policy changes until we can ensure that money no longer determines policy."

The second person to which I was able to ask a question was Senator Lindsey Graham who was there to represent John McCain. I praised him and McCain for being bi-partisan leaders in the Senate and working across the aisle, something that we need more of. Since John McCain a co-sponsor of the Bi-Partisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) I asked if the two of them would be willing to take the next step to curb the big money influence in politics and support the Fair Elections Now Act. Senator Graham said that he was not in favor of full public financing, although his reasons for supporting BCRA are the very reasons the Fair Elections Now Act is needed. So I think he may be able to make a turn around.

I also got to ask Tom Tancredo a question about immigration; essentially calling him out for demonizing immigrants and turning the work immigrant into a bad work and how he does a disservice to himself and the debate by doing such things. Ian Storrar from Common Cause got Mike Gravel to sign the public financing pledge. And I got to see Ben Cohen (from Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream) give his presentation on the bloated Pentagon spending in the federal budget and his famous Oreo presentation.

All in all, this was a great experience. I wish there had been more students there but what are you going to do.

-peace-

Daryn Cambridge
Assistant Director
The Democracy Matters Institute

Diane Feinstein Lobby Day - University of San Francisco, CA

On November 15th, the Democracy Matter coordinators from the campuses of University of San Francisco, UC Davis, and San Francisco State University lobbied Diane Feinstein in her downtown office in San Francisco. We (Dallas Cole, Constance Gordon, and I) met with Feinstein’s aid and explained the basics of the Fair Elections Now Act. We refrained from asking for direct endorsement, but felt very good about relaying the important information so that Feinstein could make a knowledgeable decision when it comes time to vote on the Act. The aid, Assistant Field Representative John Murray, was very receptive and we were able to answer most of his questions.

We spoke about FENA from the perspective of political science college students who wish to first, vote for more clean election candidates right now because we believe they represent our interests better than dirty candidates and second, hope to have the option of running for office in the future because of the clean elections system. Also, we spoke about the connection between clean elections and the rise in women’s involvement in government. We believed that Feinstein would be particularly interested in this statistic because she supports women in politics.

Lacy Clark
Democracy Matters Campus Coordinator
University of San Franciso

Political Poetry Slam - UNC Charlotte, NC

The Political Poetry Slam on October 17th was a huge success for Democracy Matters! A little over 100 people attended and we had about thirty artists share their political work. The capacity of the Ritazza Café is eighty and there was standing room only. The purpose of the event was to allow students who would not normally be interested in politics, advocacy, pro-democracy movements, etc. to express their opinions in an unorthodox way. The slam brought unlikely participants in the political process to the front stage of action. Many of the students spoke about Hurricane Katrina, the Bush administration, the war in Iraq, education, the 9/11 attacks, and many other issues they felt were important in today's society.

We began planning for the poetry slam a little over one month in advance. We worked with another student organization on campus called CHAIN Reaction. They encourage cultural diversity through various topics from religion to politics in hopes of promoting student unity on campus. We invited two spoken word teams to campus, held sign-ups throughout the week, and allowed general open mike for any students who wanted to come on stage. We funded the event (publicity, invited guests, equipment, etc) with funding from the Student Government Association.

One of the challenges that we faced was official student organization approval. We were approved in the same week that we went before student senate to request funding. However, before approval, the process was delayed by over three weeks because of system errors and delayed paper work processing by the university. We were also worried that the slam would not represent what it was intended for as far as political content. However, the artists exceeded expectations and really shared their perspective of our political system.

I believe the campaign was so successful because we had committed students working to advocate the necessity of active student participation in politics. We discovered that a lot of students are interested in the political changes that affect them; but, they are not given an outlet or ‘way to’ get involved. The slam was an opportunity to voice concern in a way that interest them—through the arts.

I feel as if the focus of the campaign was to inspire students to actively participate in our political system even if that act is simply exercising their first amendment right and expressing their current concerns about our system. Some ideas were extreme, bias, bitter, concerned, fed-up, and frustrated. These were the current feelings towards our politics expressed by students. As a result, a couple of the questions to be asked are: Why do we have these feelings? How can we participate in a way that will provoke change? It then becomes DM’s job to educate the student body on ways of promoting change and voicing concerns. Campaign finance reform is the first step to active reform in our current political system. The students thoroughly enjoyed the event. We received positive feedback, and were asked when we would be hosting the next Political Poetry Slam. Apparently, the students (more than originally thought) have much to say about the current state of our political system.

More than anything, the campaign inspired me to continue my advocacy without worry that students are not taking an active enough interest in the issues that affect them. Give them a channel, and they will speak.

Francswai Davis
Campus Coordinator
UNC Charlotte

Iraq for Sale Forum - LA Valley Community College, CA

On November 6th, we held a forum on the moneyed interests that are playing a major role in the War in Iraq. I was extremely pleased to see such a big turn out of students at our event. We had about 250 students come. It was a pleasant surprise to see so many students, because usually just as many community people come to our events as students, but this time the majority of people were students.

I think that our event was a huge success because our forum was about money in politics at its worse, when war profiteers create private mercenaries. This subject of private mercenaries is such a shocking reminder of why we need Clean Money Fair Elections because almost every minute someone is killed in the name of capital by our tax money being misused by private legislatures helping out their private corporate business partners.

In order to have people understand why it is so important that we create a real democracy for once and for all with Clean Money Fair Elections we thought that it was dire to bring military veterans to our school that were effected first hand by the malevolent war profiteers.

For our program we first showed the trailer of “Iraq for Sale”, by Robert Greenwald, which is a great depiction of the problem of private money in politics. We followed the trailer with Professor Pete Lopez who spoke about the history of war profiteering by the U.S.A and how it has gotten predominantly worse and how we are in the biggest debt we have ever been in history because of our military industrial complex.

Then we had ex U.S. Army Colonel, Ann Wright speak, who resigned from the military after 29 years of service to protest the war in Iraq. She is also an advocate of Clean Money Fair Elections and during her speech she said, “Democracy does matter, and that’s why we need more groups such as “Democracy Matters”. She also spoke about the problem of the “No bid” private contracts in places like Iraq and New Orleans, and after her speech she got a standing ovation.

We also had an Iraq Veteran named Edgar Cuevas speak at our event. He is a part of “Iraq Veterans Against the War”, as well as being a new member of “Democracy Matters” at LA Valley College. He hit home to the hearts and minds of people in the audience sharing his stories of first hand experience of interactions with private mercenaries like “Blackwater”. In his speech he stated, “It is important to have cleanly elected officials to represent us, so we can avoid getting into unjust wars based on lies”.

Then Andrea Barrera, (who is a DM member at LAVC), and I gave a presentation about the cost of the Iraq War and Clean Money Fair Elections. We had a panel discussion after that with a lot of good questions from the audience and we had a good amount of interest from students wanting to get involved with Democracy Matters.

It was a great experience and we were thanked by many people for putting on the event.

Anitra Wetzel
LA Valley College
Democracy Matters Chapter Leader

Ed Garvey and Jack Lohman Speak on Clean Elections - UWM, WI

On November 7th @ 6:00pm, Democracy Matters at the University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee held an event called "Ending the Gangsterization of Politics, Non-Partisan Style" w/ guest speakers Ed Garvey and Jack Lohman. The event was highly attended and co-sponsored by the American Democracy Project, WISPIRG, fightingbob.com, and wiscleanelections.org. Check out the video below to see clips from the event.



Dan Jackel
Campus Coordinator
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee

"Buy My Vote" Gameshow - IUPUI, IN

For National Week of Action, our IUPUI DM Chapter wanted to do something fun and interactive with the students. We reserved about a month in advance a table and a few chairs for Nov. 14^th and Nov. 15^th from 10:00 am-1:00 pm in a central location of campus where many students hang out. We then met as a small committee of about 5 to brainstorm ideas. We knew we wanted to capture the interests of students in a fun way that would get our message across, so one of our members came up with the idea of a game show.

We tossed ideas back and forth and decided to name the game show “Buy My Vote.” We wanted to do an auction format in which someone would play the emcee, two students play politicians, and another student play a corporation. In order to get IUPUI students involved, we planned to ask them to participate by giving them the Democracy Dollars so they could bid against the corporation for the politicians vote. At this point, we were still a little fuzzy on the plans, but we decided we would present this to all of our members at our next meeting a week before the events to hash out the details.

A week before the events, we had a regular meeting where we discussed a few more details for the game show, and we asked if anyone wanted to commit to certain roles. We planned what we could say, and I printed off an example of a script from a street theater put on by another DM campus that we could work off of and make it our own. At the meeting, we made props for the game show, such as two “for sale” price tags to hang around the politicians’ necks, a big check in the amount of $50 million for the corporation, and a poster displaying the title of the game show.

A day before the events began, I sent reminder emails to those who said they would help out and to all students to ask them to come out and support us. A couple people who had volunteered were unable to attend, so we knew we needed to keep things flexible in order for them to work.

On Nov. 14^th, we had about 8 members show up to help with the game show. We reorganized who was going to play what role, got out our props, and commenced to get IUPUI students to play. We started out a little slow and tried working out the kinks so that students would bid against the corporation for the politicians, but students were a little confused by the process. We modified and simplified our original game plan so that students would have to choose just one politician rather than bid for one against the corporation.

The new game show began with us asking students to play a quick game that would only take 2 minutes of their time. The emcee would then ask about an issue they cared about and asked the student to vote for one politician after a short debate about that issue. Once the student announced who he/she would vote for, the corporation sneaks in and presents the $50 million check to the candidate and states they will give the politician their money only if they do the exact opposite they just promised the student they would do.

The students who participated got the message, and thought the skit was pretty funny. We told them about DM and asked them to sign the FENA petition to support legislation that would stop this problem. We had around 40 students in total play the game show, which drew in quite a large crowd. Our members really got into their roles, which I think helped keep up the excitement and draw others to watch.

On Nov. 15^th, we were a few students shy of putting on the whole production of the game show, so we decided to actively ask students to sign the FENA petition. Overall both days were pretty successful, with the game show probably attracting the most attention. This event was also a good way for our members to get involved and to feel empowered by getting other students to care about clean elections. This event was a lot of fun, and I think we did some great work, too!

Caridad Ax
Campus Coordinator
Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)

Group Presentation w/ NY Citizen Action - SUNY Binghamton, NY

I first began planning an event for the National Week of Action about a month in advance. I set my sights high, planning for two events—one on the main campus and one at the Downtown Campus of Binghamton University. I wanted each to be about an hour or two long with various activities and raffles. I also wanted to involve the community in some way. I didn’t realize at the time, but I set a very unrealistic goal for myself.

As the National Week of Action drew closer, I met with Citizen Action to organize these events. I figured with their help I could easily pull off two events. Upon meeting with them, we talked it over and decided on pooling all our resources for one event at the Downtown Center. The Downtown Center has been built very recently and generated substantial community interest. It would be the perfect place to gather both students and community members for a Clean Money event. I made the decision that night to have a smaller event on campus for the main purpose of spreading the word about the event at the Downtown Campus. This would be more reasonable a goal considering I really had no idea how to plan even one event.

So, with the help of Citizen Action and my group members, we designed an event that would be a sort of information session/press conference regarding Clean Money. I went to the Downtown Center shortly after this meeting (about two weeks before the Week of Action), and reserved the room for the event. After that, I had people from Citizen Action and my group meet at the room to go over some plans for organizing this event. We decided to set up booths representing stations with different materials that would serve to educate both students and community members.

After this initial step, I moved on to organizing the food, fliers, and materials for the tables. I coordinated with Citizen Action to split up some of the planning tasks. I would be in charge of spreading the word to students and getting them to attend and Citizen Action would work on creating interest within the community, the media and with local politicians.

To publicize the event on campus, I felt it important to pass out fliers and put an ad in the school newspaper. The ad ran on the Tuesday two days before the event, and the day before the event my group and I passed out over 250 fliers around campus. It was hard not to get discouraged by the mass apathy of the student body. However, it was encouraging to think that if even five out of the hundreds of people we talked to came to this event it was a success. I set my goal low. I decided I would be happy with 20 people total at my event. The room was sort of small and could look decently filled up with 20 people. I also envisioned people continuously coming and going.

On Wednesday, the day before the event, I went to take care of the food preparations. Food would be my biggest draw with the students, and I knew it had to be done right. With funding from Democracy Matters and Citizen Action, I was able to get subs and pizza. Citizen Action enlisted the help of a local politician, Barbara Abbott King, and had local news channels agree to cover the event.

On the day of the event, I arrived at the Downtown Campus two hours early to make sure everything went smoothly. I was concerned that students would not come from the main campus, which is kind of far from the Downtown Campus. It was also raining, and I thought that might keep some people away. My fears were never realized. The event went great. I’m not too sure how many students actually came from the main campus all the way to the Downtown Campus, but I did see a few students come in holding the fliers I passed out the day before. It also worked out perfectly because we planned on starting the event just as classes let out at the Downtown Campus and many people got out of class hungry and eager to have some free food.

The media covered the event, interviewed me and covered our press release.

http://www.wicz.com/fox40/video.asp?video=11%2D15%2D07+clean%2Ewmv

Barbara Abbott King really helped out with speaking on the issue of Clean Money and how it shaped her experiences running for office. Most of the food was eaten and everyone seemed to have a great time talking about Clean Money. I spoke to a few students about Clean Money as well and saw tons of people taking handouts, signing petitions, signing letters to politicians, and supporting our cause.

Dave Ugelow

Campus Coordinator

SUNY Binghamton

Political Science Debate - Western Carolina Univserity, NC

1. Why did I want to organize this event?

I feel like it is important for students to hear about the issues from other students. The event was also a great follow up after the DM Faculty Panel Discussion last week. The debate also allowed students to address questions to the panel which generated good discussion of the issues.

2. What steps did I take to organizing it?

First I created a list of questions, approximately 25 questions total, to address campaign finance reform, the presidential election in 2008, and water conservation issues affecting North Carolina. Then I contacted the three parties on campus, the College Democrats, College Greens, and College Republicans to set a date and distribute the questions. The third item on my to-do-list was to send out promotions for the event through campus email, Facebook, university radio station, university TV station, and political science Listserve for majors. Before the event, I had to create an agenda for the welcome, announcements, and format of debate to keep the event structured. On the night of the event, I found two DM volunteers to keep track of time and hold the microphone to receive questions from the students.

3. What were some of the challenges I faced?

For me, I gave each group the opportunity to choose 5 of the questions from the list I had created and email me the questions they would like to start open with a 2 minute statement and the other groups would be given a 30 second rebuttal. The College Greens did not have 5 questions to give to me at the debate.

4. What accounted for the success of the campaign?

Of course with any campaign prior proper planning prevents poor performance but I must say the political science professors are very supportive of Democracy Matters activities on campus and they encourage their students to attend.

5. What lessons did I learn in organizing this campaign?

For student coordinators it is important that they are listed as the primary contact, because faculty and students sometimes have questions that they would like addressed before the event and people from the community may want to attend your event. It is very important to centralize the information from one source.

Coley Phillips
Campus Coordinator
Western Carolina University

Guest Speakers - Southern Methodist University, TX

Rebuilding Democracy in America: Bipartisan Support for Campaign Finance Reform

Democracy Matters SMU

The event “Rebuilding Democracy in America: Bipartisan Support for Campaign Finance Reform” took place on Wednesday, November 7, 2007 at Southern Methodist University in the Hughes-Trigg Student Center. Arizona State Representative Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat, and North Carolina Court of Appeals Judge Donna Stroud, a Republican, both spoke about the Clean Elections systems in their states and entertained questions after their presentation.

In total, we had 75 attendees. The audience was very diverse – we had a lot of SMU students, a few non-SMU students, and quite a few non-students. There were three classes that offered extra credit for attendance (a politics class, a sociology class, and an English class), and we also worked very hard to promote the event via class announcements, announcements at other club meetings, flyers, stake signs, and basically a lot of constant networking. SMU cosponsors included the Political Science Symposium, Students for a Better Society, Association of Black Students, the Women’s Center, the University Honors Program, and the Department for Leadership and Community Involvement.

Most of the non-SMU attendees came as a result of the participation of our local Dallas Clean Elections Texas coordinator, Liz Wally. Furthermore, the League of Women Voters Dallas cosponsored the event and I believe a few attendees learned about the event from the League’s email promotion. Despite not being to raise the funds last minute, LWV Dallas brought six small cameras and filmed the event. This is awesome as it is, but it also looked great – very professional. DVDs should be available soon to distribute and share.

As for the presentation content, Representative Kyrsten Sinema began and simply told her story and described the system in Arizona, as an introduction to the concept of Clean Elections. Then, Judge Donna Stroud spoke about the system in North Carolina and even presented some comparisons of Texas and North Carolina’s judicial systems. This was especially pertinent to those of us in the audience who are involved with Clean Elections Texas, which is seriously considering pushing Clean Elections at the state judicial level. While New Mexico has passed Clean Elections at the judicial level, only North Carolina has had time to use the system. Therefore, North Carolina is an important role model for any state looking to take action at the judicial level. The two presentations complemented each other nicely, and we had some great questions at the end.

Ultimately, I wished I could have allowed each speaker about twenty more minutes to really expand on their material, share some anecdotes, make it more relevant and real to some of the students, but that simply would have made the event too long. Despite this, I felt that the speakers were received well. Having a speaker from each party was vital to the success of the event, due to the political atmosphere at SMU. Politics can become very polarized here, and I was pleased that Representative Sinema and Judge Stroud displayed such an excellent example of cooperation and respect across party.

Cody Meador
Campus Coordinator
Southern Methodist University

Op-Ed at Rutgers University, NJ

In continuing with the spirit of journalism activism, Simon Burger, Campus Coordinator at Rutgers University in New Jersey, wrote an excellent op-ed about the Hsu/Clinton fundraising scandal. He lays out the issue very clearly and leads the reader right into the solution. Good job!

“You get invited to dinner somewhere and someone gives you some money. And then you get a call a month later and he wants to see you. Are you going to say no?”—Former Congressman Peter Kostmayer, Pennsylvania.

Whether Norman Hsu is guilty or not, and whether or not Senator Hillary Clinton’s political campaign or any other knew about his troubles with the law, the funding scandal involving campaign funds from this business executive are just another symptom of the broken system of campaign finance we have here in America.

The sheer amount of time that both the media and various campaigns have spent on this case is argument enough for a change. But let’s look at the other factors, and see exactly why publicly funded elections are not just a good idea, they are necessary if we want to return any semblance of trust to our political campaigns, and to our politicians, here in the United States.

The current limit on contributions from one person to a candidate is $2,000 per election cycle. This may not seem like a lot, but let’s keep in mind that very few people can actually afford to go around dropping $2k on their favorite candidate, let alone sprinkling the legally allowed $95,000 between the candidate, his or her party, and the Political Action Committees that support them. This is just for one candidate; it’s standard practice to donate to both sides, so just in case your favorite doesn’t win, you’ve still got an inside man.

All this means that giving money to your candidate becomes restricted to the super-wealthy. According to data provided by the Senate Office of Public Records and publicly available at opensecrets.org, roughly .01% of Americans contribute over 40% of total political contributions.

There is also no restriction on bundling, where one fundraiser can hold an event to raise money, collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars (Hsu raised $850,000 for Clinton) and then tying it all together in a neat package for delivery to their candidate of choice. Of course, the checks still have the original contributors’ names on them, but who has time to pay attention to that? The real credit goes to the bundler, who garners special titles like Clinton’s “HillRaisers,” Rudy Guiliani’s “Team Captains,” and Mitt Romney’s “Founders.”

One can certainly argue that raising this much money for a candidate has no influence on them, but this is simply a distortion of reality. The pharmaceutical industry spent nearly $30 million during the 2002 Congressional election. In 2003, the new Medicare bill contained little to no stipulations for price negotiations with pharmaceutical companies, leaving our seniors with huge prescription costs. Surprised?

Contending that this would be the bill that many Congressmen would vote for anyway is certainly plausible, but it is ridiculous to say that nobody was influenced by campaign contributions. Bush spent $300 million and Kerry $240 million in the 2004 election, and the cost of the average Senate campaign is almost $8 million. A viable campaign simply can’t be run without huge campaign fundraising. This leaves us with politicians who must consider their campaign finances when deciding how to make laws. They might not want to—they have to. In fact, Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and John Edwards and Republican Mike Huckabee have all spoken in favor of campaign finance, all the while accepting these contributions. Are they talking out of both sides of their mouth? No, they simply have no choice.

Does this mean to get any reform we all have to vote for Obama, Edwards, or Huckabee? No, fortunately not. We can achieve change without supporting any specific candidates by urging our Congressmen to vote for the Fair Elections Now Act (FENA). This act would provide FULL public financing for elections. This would mean that once a candidate acquired substantial public support, they would receive full funding for their campaign, according to a formula that would actually allow these politicians to stay entirely competitive. FENA doesn’t raise free speech issues, like mandatory funding systems, because it is entirely voluntary, and the cost to each taxpayer ends up being less than $20. Cheap! And in return? We get a more diverse group of candidates. We get politicians who concentrate on the issues, instead of the money they need to raise. And, we get the trust that our legislators our working for us, not for the wealthy special interests that get them elected.

Op-Ed at Nassau Community College, NY

Writing op-eds and submitting them to school and local papers is a great way to generate attention to a variety of issues and their connections with money in politics. Above is an op-ed written by Andrew Calderaro at Nassau Community College.

Democracy MATTERS: Remembering 9/11 with Reform

By Andrew Calderaro

In a poll conducted last year by Lake Research and Bellwether Research, 82% of likely voters believed that overwhelming change would result from publicly funded elections (as opposed to the current system of private financing). Although lower, 52% viewed Congress as unethical and 66% asserted lobbyists were unethical. While many incidents could be used to dignify proposed campaign finance reform, the anniversary of September 11, 2001 is one event above all others that should compel us to rethink our electoral process.

In his 1961 farewell address, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the American populace of the growing military-industrial complex. What he meant to say, though advised not to, was the military-industrial-congressional complex. The roughly 3,000 who perished in the Twin Towers, the nearly 3,800 soldiers who have died and close to 30,000 who have been injured in Iraq are numbers that pale in comparison to the profits made by military contractors for contracts awarded by Congress for services in Afghanistan and Iraq -- i.e. Kellogg, Brown and Root alone (a former subsidiary of infamous Halliburton) received over $11,000,000,000 in contracts by 2004 -- a result of the very phenomenon Eisenhower foreshadowed nearly a half-century ago. This anniversary, we must consider not only the military-industrial-congressional complex, but the entire system of privately financed campaigns and resort to a different sort of reflection with hard-line questioning: If getting elected to office requires millions of dollars and much of this money is paid by the corporations benefiting from laws and government contracts, who do laws and decisions like whether or not go to war in the first place favor? How does this affect our democratic ideals? Most important, how is this epidemic to be solved?

Elected office has historically been for the wealthy and those with access to the requisite financing. According to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), during the 2004 election cycle the average cost to win a seat in the House of Representatives exceeded $1 million; to win a seat in the more exclusive senate typically ran a candidate over $7 million. Of course, some candidates were fortunate enough to spend a little less, though others doled out a bit more than the average. For example, Representative Roy Blunt (R-MO) spent well over $3 million in 2006; in 2004 Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) raised nearly $14 million; in 2006 Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) spent close to $41 million, and the list goes on.

Despite the alienation of the poor and those of moderate means from elected office, self-financing of campaigns is seldom relied upon. Candidates turn to private contributions from individuals and political action committees (PACs - private organizations formed to elect a candidate, usually on behalf of a corporation or special interest). The Center for Responsive Politics reported that in 2004, PACs from the top ten contributing military contractors spent $8.17 million. In 2000, these same groups spent nearly $60 million to lobby the federal government.

Campaign contributions are funneled to all the right recipients. For example, the defense sector naturally targets members of the Armed Services Committee both of the House and the Senate. During the 2006 election cycle Committee Chairman Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) added nearly $250,000 to his war chest; Senator Bill Nelson's (D-FL) campaign efforts were aided by a $178,000 boost; not to be outdone, Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) received $275,000, and so on. In turn, they're expected to support and even draft legislation that aides their contributors. Given this, it is no surprise that the top ten donating military contractors -- Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Co., United Technologies, Honeywell International, SAIC Inc., and DRS Technologies -- received over $82 billion in federal
contracts in 2003 alone.

When there is this much money and power involved in military contracts and running for office, there is an incentive not to merely go to war, but to stay at war. The U.S. citizen must ask himself: Why wouldn't the U.S. go to war? Further, what other aspects of our lives can the powerful benefit from exploiting?

The defense sector is just one of many engaged in this political symbiosis. The Center for Responsive Politics reports that on a list of top campaign contributors from all sectors dating back to 1990, the highest ranking military contractor is Lockheed Martin -- at 36th. Thought that FedEx was content with simply delivering that birthday present from your aunt halfway across the country? It ranks 21st on the list. Next time you dig into a bowl of Kraft's creamy mac & cheese, don't forget that Kraft's parent company, the Altria Group, ranks 16th. At the top is the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, which has donated nearly $40 million in the past 15 years, including substantial support for John Kerry's 2004 presidential bid.

With substantial sums of money exchanging the hands involved in our electoral process, it is only natural that some measures of regulation have been put in place. President Theodore Roosevelt was the first mainstream champion of reform, though his turn-of-the-century efforts were far from comprehensive. It wouldn't be until the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 and the creation of the Federal Election Commission in 1975 that oversight of campaign contributions would gain greater notoriety. More recently, presidential candidate Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) sponsored the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in 2002, and the currently Democraticly lead 110th Congress passed certain regulations shortly after taking office. All of these efforts however, have proven porous and ineffectual in averting corruption and shadow relationships like the military-industrial-congressional complex. What is necessary is full public financing of campaigns, an immerging solution in the form of Clean Elections.

Clean Elections is a compelling alternative to the current campaign finance system. It is a voluntary system of full public financing that offers all citizens the opportunity to run a viable campaign, while freeing the electoral process from dependency on private funding. While this may seem too good to be true, Clean Elections should not be chalked up as some grandiose utopian ideal. Many localities have already implemented the Clean Elections system, and it is thriving in statewide elections in Maine and Arizona, and in some form in New Mexico, Vermont, North Carolina, the cities of Albuquerque and Portland, OR. Connecticut will offer Clean Elections starting in 2008. Remarkably, according to Fair Elections: A Practical Guide to Full Public Funding of Congressional Elections, in 2006 78 percent of Maine's candidates used the Clean Elections system; in Arizona, 58 percent of general election candidates participated, including Gov. Janet Napolitano (D).

To participate, all one must do is prove he or she is a viable candidate by collecting a small number of Qualifying Contributions, usually $5 per donor. After the satisfactory amount (as deemed by the state or locality) has been collected, private donations end. The candidate then begins to receive public financing from a Clean Elections commission for the primary election and, if he or she wins, for the general election as well. For example, Maine Clean Elections candidates in a gubernational contest receive primary election funding equal to 50% of the general election allocation. State representative and state senate candidates receive primary funding equal to 30% - 40% of the general election allocation. If a participating candidate is facing a privately or self-funded opponent with an exorbitant war chest, the commission will dole out "fair fight" funds to strengthen the Clean Elections effort.

Many non-profit, non-partisan lobbies and think tanks were created to see Clean Elections established in more cities and states. Democracy Matters was founded for just this purpose and has been thriving since its inception. Started in 2001 at Colgate University in upstate New York by alum and NBA player Adonal Foyle, Democracy Matters has taken the college community by storm. To date there are nearly 100 college chapters from New York to Hawaii. Luckily for Nassau Community College, Long Island's first Democracy Matters chapter was established on campus this semester. With an exciting hands-on agenda planned, Democracy Matters at NCC will further educate the college community about the current state of America's electoral process and how Clean Elections can effect change. In time, this chapter will have proven to be one of the instruments of change in the Clean Elections effort. Any student can become involved; indeed, there is no better time to consider participating.

Campus Call-In, Minnesota

Call-In day was what i would call a success here at Gustavus. We tabled from 9:00am until 3:00pm (i told everyone to essentially think of it as if we were tabling to advertise some event, except this time the event would be going on while tabling, so we needed to be more vocal and attention-grabbing). Kira had the brilliant idea of making cookies to give to each person who made a call, thus we called it "Cookie for a Call" (it's really hard to reject a warm, gooey chocolate chip cookie). I wish we had kept a tally of how many people stopped to call (my fault), but i can say with certainty that a lot of people stopped by since we made about 200 cookies to start with and had about 50 left by the end of the day (that would imply about 6-7.5% of the campus called, but that's not including the people who called and didn't want a cookie). So, despite my poor attempt at some statistical support, i know that we definitely helped to keep thephone lines busy throughout the day (we had people leave plenty of phone messages because the offices were busy with other calls).  Here's the rap I wrote that we had people use for their calls (not exactly, great, but i think it sufficed):

"Hi, my name is _______ and I am a student at Gustavus Adolphus College in Saint Peter, MN. I am calling to encourage Senator/Representative ________ to support the Fair Elections Now Act which would give Congress the option to have publicly-funded elections.  This bill is important because of the way our current democracy is being undermined by special interests and "big money." I believe in having a American democracy in which the voices of the voters truly count and make a difference in the decisions made by our nation's top legislators, and I believe that fair and clean elections are a step in the right direction for a more honest, more people-oriented government."

DM Campus Coordinator

Clean Candidate Speaks with Students, Ironwood High School, AZ

On April 30th, Arizona State Representative Jackie Thrasher, spoke at Ironwood High School in Glendale, AZ. This event was organized and coordinated by a DM high school fellow, Jenn Robinson. Jenn first contacted all her elected officials to learn their opinions on clean elections. She was pleasantly surprised when she found out that Rep. Jackie Thrasher not only supported clean elections but also ran and won as a clean candidate. Jenn then decided to invite Rep. Thrasher, a former high school teacher, to come and speak at Ironwood High School.

Jenn responded to the following questions so that others DM organizers can successfully organize a similar event.

1.  What was the biggest challenge you faced in organizing this event? What lessons did you learn from these challenges?

The biggest challenged I faced in organizing this event was having the courage to contact many state representatives, like Jackie Thrasher, and other officials asking their opinions of Clean Elections and then asking if they would come speak at our school.  This was difficult because I had no idea what kind of responses I was going to receive since I've never made direct contact with elected officials like that.  It was also a bit of a reality check when I got back emails that totally bashed Clean Elections.  I was under the impression that everyone understood that running clean was a good thing even if they still chose to run traditionally, but I was quite wrong...There were some pretty vulgar replies that made me realize how controversial everything ends up being in politics.  I learned that you just have to take the bad with the good and be persistent and not let others' negativity discourage you.

2.  What were some of the questions that students asked and how did Rep. Thrasher repsond?

After Jackie Thrasher explained her motivation for running for office: the lack of funding for education, there were some students that questioned why so little money was being allotted for their education.  Rep. Thrasher responded by saying that she felt the same way-puzzled by the idea that AZ could be next to last in funding for public education, and that is why she had to do something about it.  Another student asked what political party she was from (as she had been very nonpartisain in her entire speech.) She responded honestly, "Democratic," and an uproar arrose in the young crowd...I asked the question, "How would you respond to people who say that Clean Elections is a violation of peoples' first amendment right to freedom of speech since they are being limited on the amount of money, and therefore support, they can give to a candidate running clean?"  Rep. Thrasher responded by saying that since it is an option to run clean, she doesn't see it as impeding of the right to free speech. 

3.  If someone else wanted to bring an elected official into speak, what suggestions would you give them?

I would tell them to make sure they stay in close contact with that official; email at least once a week to keep reconfirming the date and time since elected officials are such busy people.  I would also make sure that you have everything planned out and organized prior to the official's arrival.  (I had all the classes who were attending the event figured out but I forgot that I needed to have the microphone set up so I had to take about 5 quick minutes to set that up and get decent lighting in our theatre.)  I would also say to make sure you send them a thank you card after they have spoken.  That's always nice...

Jenn Robinson
DM High School Fellow
Ironwood High School, AZ

Written Testimony - Johns Hopkins University, MD

Democracy Matters coordinators have been working alongside Progressive Maryland (www.progressivemaryland.org) to help promote and try to pass a Clean Elections bill in the state of Maryland. Esther Bochner, campus coordinator at Johns Hopkins University, submitted the following written testimony to the state's House Ways and Means committee, urging them to pass the bill and send it to a floor vote. Her efforts proved successful!

Students at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, are plagued by the same illness affecting millions of students nationwide: cynicism. We are tired of seeing the same diluted pool of candidates dominate local, state and national elections due to incredible financial burdens. We are frustrated by the amount of qualified individuals incapable of making a difference because they are incapable of attaining the funds necessary to compete with wealthy candidates. We are unhappy with the current electoral system in which politicians are forced to spend more time and effort raising the money needed to run a competitive campaign than focusing on the issues and concerns of the people they aspire to represent. We are no longer content to sit by and hope for the best. That is why hundreds of students at the Johns Hopkins University have united in support of the Clean Elections Bill.

The bill provides us with hope for the future of Maryland politics. In recent years, campaign costs have increased exponentially, and the best candidates are unable to run for office or win elections because of the hurdles they encounter, not in effecting their policies, but in raising enough money. Clean Elections would allow qualified politicians who have proven themselves through collecting enough qualifying contributions to receive public funds for primary and general elections. This would help level the playing field between promising candidates and their wealthy opponents, and consequently produce elections that are about who would accomplish the most for the state, not who has the most money.

To students at the Johns Hopkins University, the Clean Elections Bill represents more than just a hope and excitement for the future of Maryland politics; it marks significant progress towards producing the ideals of equality our democracy strives to achieve. People of all races, genders and social classes will have the opportunity to run for elected office. Students who are jaded by the current, static process are invigorated by the possibilities that Clean Elections would introduce. The prospect of participating in a system where individuals are no longer inhibited by financial constraints, and all citizens possess equal opportunity to effect real change has revitalized the Hopkins campus. We are eagerly monitoring the progress of the state and federal bills for Clean Elections, and anticipate the bright, vibrant, optimistic future of our country.

-peace-

Daryn Cambridge
Eastern Regional Director

Political Spelling Bee - Hofstra University, NY

On Wednesday, April 11, from 8:00 pm to10:30 pm was the 4th Annual College Democrats Spelling Bee. My chapter of Democracy Matters, the Hofstra Democrats, and the Hofstra Republicans sponsored the event. I personally didn't come up with the idea. The fact that it was the 4th annual spelling bee means that it has been around for a while; all I did was co-sponsor it. In planning for the event, we needed to know which organizations would be sponsoring it with us, the projected amount of people in attendance, the room needed for the event, and the amount of food to buy. We raffled off new iPod shuffles and gift cards and provided free food, thus making for a respectable turnout. The words chosen for the event were all political in nature; as a way to educate the contestants and the audience about politics. I was able to pass out some Democracy Matters information to those in attendance of the event.
The Spelling Bee itself worked in the typical format, there was a judges table set up on stage, a host for the event (dressed like a bee) to call up each contestant and read them their respective word, and seats on stage for the contestants. The challenges faced by this event were, for the most part, technical in nature. Since the Spelling Bee was in an auditorium, equipment needed
to be set up and sounds checks had to be performed. Overall, there were minimal problems with the event.

Bradley Schloss
Campus Coordinator
Hofstra Democracy Matters

Campus Debate - SUNY Brockport, NY

On Tuesday February 17th 2007, The SUNY Brockport Democracy Matters chapter hosted a student debate between the College Democrats and the College Republicans. This was the biggest political activism event organized on campus. Many students felt that is was informative and very necessary because of the lack of civic engagement on campus.

We started to plan the debate two weeks before finals last year. It was at that time that we brain stormed ideas. We discussed varies topics including, abortion, the patriot act, The War in Iraq, inflation on tuition, clean money clean elections, and media bias. We decided that we were going to split the debate into three topics, which was between inflation of tuition in recent years, media bias and the War in Iraq. It was interesting how the topics unfolded during the debates because we didn’t want to follow traditional debate guidelines. In a traditional style debate the regulators assign positions and enforce the rules of the debate strictly. Our goal for the debate was simply to promote students to become involved with this issue. We wanted to advocate civic engagement and show how these political issues have an effect on everyone’s life.

We started to prepare for the debate in late January, when we got back from winter break. We reserved a room, and decided to table in our student union to promote the event. The student government and the American Democracy Project helped fund us by printing flyers and posting them on campus.

The day of the debate we set up the room so it would help invite guest. We posted some Democracy Matters flyers on the wall and positioned the tables so that I would it easier for a student to hear the speaker. The group also made introduction/itinerary packets for the students. In each packet there was a brief discussion about the topic, we found the information on the Internet. (i.e., for media bias we included the story about Obama and his accusations brought against him concerning attending a Muslim terrorist school).

The debate began with an introduction about democracy matters and the clubs. We showed the Public Campaign video so students could understand the basics about our club. Then after the video I gave the structure about the debate. Our chapter decided that we were going to have three separate rounds with an opening and rebuttals with the two organizations. We limited the opening speech to 5 min, and each rebuttal was three minuets. During the debate over the War in Iraq, I stood up after the teams had exhausted their rounds and ask the two teams to continue for another two rounds because it was a hot topic with many students becoming happy or angry. The emotion drawn form each student showed the success of the debate.

When the debate was over we had a question and answer session so that we could, open the floor to the audience and get them involved. It was shocking with the level of interest the students had. The crowd at the peak of the debate reached nearly 100 people. For the most part most students where their for their personal interest, however some professors at the college awarded extra credit, for attending. This, in combination with the flyers and word of mouth promotion, proved to be an effective way.

Some advice for any chapter that might want to set up a debate on their campus would be, had an official timekeeper. It was hard for me to keep time while concentrating on the regulations. I would also think of a way to get pizza or food to the debate. I believe that puts the extra motivation in students, to attend any event. Over all, the debate gained the attention of the whole campus and as a leading organization we plan to continue this success by hosting another debate in late April before finals.

Randall Franklin
DM Campus Coordinator
SUNY Brockport

A Different Kind of Numbers Campaign - St. Lawrence University, NY

St. Lawrence University's chapter of Democracy Matters recently organized a different kind of numbers campaign. We decided to focus on the number one billion, the estimated campaign cost for the 2008 presidential election. Instead of just posting flyers around the campus, our group brainstormed a new way to communicate this information to the student body.

Last year, a display in our student center attempted to raise awareness for rape and sexual harassment by stringing lines ofcolored T-shirts across the atrium, right where students walk everyday to eat, check their mail, attend events, or socialize with friends. With this idea in mind, our group came up with the idea of hanging strands of Democracy Matters bills across the student center atrium.

During one club meeting, we taped one thousand bills to strings, with the idea that each bill equaled one million dollars. This meant that the bills in our display represented one billion dollars. Our club spent some extra time that night hanging up the bills in long, drooping lines across the student center. The finished product was striking, obvious to anyone who walked through the student center. This display was accentuated with posters saying ONE BILLION, an explanatory sign in the student center, and emails
explaining the display.

Our goal was to educate people about the extravagant campaigning that is in our near future for the 2008 presidential election and the purpose of Democracy Matters. It seemed to spark an interest in some people, as many club members had discussions about the display with friends. One new person came to our meeting because of her interest in the display.

Altogether, the campaign was a success. We accomplished our goal of educating the campus about the existence of dirty money in politics. If we were to do it again, we could try to engage the campus more by holding campus discussions or a speaker on the subject of clean elections. We also could have more explanatory signs that were even more noticeable to the people passing through. However, for our first attempt at a different kind of numbers campaign, we are extremely pleased with the results. We would encourage other campuses to give it a try!

-Erin Griffin
St. Lawrence University