The Problem With Organizing For Action

[Katorama]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Rhiannon12866 (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Daily Kos

"For those of you giddy with excitement over Friday's announcement of OFA 3.0, aka Organizing for Action, just stop for a minute and consider that the largest organization in Democratic Party history is now prevented by law from engaging in partisan politics.

For those of us who still care about the Democratic Party and continue to work to elect more Democratic candidates, this was stunning news today. All the technology, infrastructure and volunteers amassed from 2008-2012 are now lost to us. In other words, President Obama, the leader of the Democratic Party, has just thumbed his nose at the DNC and picked up his toys and taken them home to Chicago."


Read more: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/19/1180293/-The-problem-with-Organizing-for-Action

---

Granted, the first thing the new Organizing For Action did was send out emails asking for more money. This after Obama's strong comments about how 501c's and similar groups funnel too much money into politics.

I'd like to see them start tackling things like unemployment, single payer, banking and financial abuses before they start doing this.

And I'm pretty sure that most senators/congressmen are going to be telling OFA organizers that "the NRA, AIPAC, mining/defense/tech/agri/pharma/Big Oil/financial people were just in my office yesterday, and they gave me some real convincing reasons to not vote in favor of your agenda".

Seems like all the infrastructure/databases/money are going to probably go into giving OFA staffers nice jobs, nice offices, a West Wing lifestyle, and a "legacy" of creating another layer of policy wonks, training seminars, parties and the same bullshit that blocks the arteries of the party.

At the expense of ignoring local and Congressional races, statewide initiatives...

I had a feeling something was brewing while helping out with Obama For America in my area. I suspected that there was some sort of end game with some of the paid staff; it got to the point where I had to explain to them that I wasn't putting in hundreds of hours of my own time for some sort of turd polishing party for their careers.

[JDPriestly]

1. This has a bright side. These volunteers will continue to work for the Democratic Party,

just not under the auspices of OFA which always has been an Obama organization.

I think it is a great idea because it will keep volunteers involved and in tune with the Democratic Party between presidential elections. This will be a corps that the Democratic Party can call on. The e-mail lists and phone numbers will not be lost to the Democratic Party.

[Katorama]

7. Well, Organizing for Action will always be an Obama organization as well.

I get the fact that they are trying to create a legacy here; something lasting, influential and hopefully effective.

I think there are strict limitations on how involved 501c's can be with political activities, and how much the party will be able to "call on" them.

I just think that the last thing the party needs is another layer of talking heads creating distraction and taking attention away from critical goals.

I just wish they had sent out a questionnaire asking their volunteers what issues were important to them; what we would like to see them focusing on before they asked for our money.

Personally, I'm going to write my checks to Congressional candidates in critical races coming up. Until the new OFA can show me what they are going to do for gun victims, the mentally ill, seniors, civil rights, and a hundred other issues, I'd like to see what they do with the 5 million bucks they ended the campaign with. If this is going to be another organization that comes in with a bang, raises a lot of money then is never heard from again, I'll pass.

[judesedit]

2. I have gotten no requests for money. Only thanks. Check the small print. Probably a GOP troll.

[backscatter712]

3. If they've gone non-profit, then they're probably going for issue-advocacy.

Poverty, environmentalism, education, health care. Any organization can advocate for policies. They just can't endorse specific candidates or political parties.

They probably did this for tax reasons - non-partisan organizations get tax exemptions, while explicitly partisan organizations do not.

[Cha]

4. How is this "breaking news"?

Just more divisive shite.

[dipsydoodle]

5. Article - aside firm which too old for LBN

dated 18th.

[Botany]

6. "now prevented by law from engaging in partisan politics"

Fine by me .... it has now morphed into an organization which @ its
core is about making America a better place. I just gave them 3.5
hours last Saturday working @ a Boys and Girls club in Columbus,
OH. Don't worry we will have plenty of places where we can work
the political angle.

Working to make America a better place is a good thing. This about
getting things done @ the base level ...... I picked up trash and pruned
a cherry tree and it had nothing to do w/ politics but about the fact
I am the nicest person in the world ...... do I need to add this?

BTW be sure to try the pizza here @ DU.

[Rhiannon12866]

8. Locking, sorry, but this isn't breaking news.

However, your thoughtful post would be perfectly appropriate for Good Reads, Politics 2013 or GD. Since it's an opinion piece, I would probably choose Good Reads. Thanks for your understanding.

Here's the Standard of Purpose for Latest Breaking News stories:

Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.