Russ Feingold Speaks Out

[undeterred]

Interview with John Nichols in The Nation
January 13, 2011

Russ Feingold was a different kind of senator—more committed to progressive principles than to a party, an internationalist who opposed free-trade deals because they served multinational corporations rather than multinational communities, a stalwart defender of the Constitution whose commitment to civil liberties and regard for the requirement that wars be declared by Congress led him to stand alone against presidents and colleagues. Feingold's independence and rectitude were such that the most conservative member of the Senate, Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn, would mark the departure of the most progressive member by saying of the Wisconsin Democrat, "One man of great integrity his word and to his values through every crisis and every vote."

So it should come as no surprise that Feingold will be a different kind of ex-senator. Instead of retaining his residence in Washington and signing on with some K Street lobbying firm, he packed up his apartment and headed home to Middleton, Wisconsin, where he'll live in the same modest house he owned when he first ran for the Senate in 1992. Feingold has taken a teaching post at Marquette University's Law School in Milwaukee, and he's already outlining a book that will be highly critical of recent US foreign policy. But there is much more on Feingold's agenda. After maintaining relative silence since his narrow defeat in November, he arranged to talk with me on the last day of his third term. Just minutes after finishing his service as a senator, Feingold and I conducted a wide-ranging interview in which an upbeat and highly engaged former legislator explained that, far from leaving the public stage, he intends to embrace the role of citizen reformer, continue challenging corporate power and play a part in renewing and extending the progressive movement. He is not running for president in 2012. But he surely hopes to influence a president, a nation and the world. Here is some of our conversation:

Nichols: Why, after years of serving as such an independent senator, such a maverick, did you get swept up in the wave that defeated so many Democrats in 2010? Why didn't the fact that you were so often at odds with your own party and president insulate you?

Feingold: I think people got in a mindset that they weren't going to make distinctions between different Democrats. They wanted to send a message, particularly to anybody who was an incumbent, particularly to anybody who had supported the president's policies on some high-profile issues. So I think that was more important to...people than looking at the actual record. People wanted to send a message. Sometimes elections are for that purpose. I respect that. I don't think it was a reflection on my record or what I was doing; somehow, there was enough concern about the way things were going that it prevented people from considering the record.

Much more at: http://www.thenation.com/article/157719/russ-feingold-speaks-out

:patriot:

[madrchsod]

1. it was such a shame wisconsin elected a concrete block...

instead of reelecting russ. one of the few true progressives in the democratic party. but at least he`s not going to fade away!

[undeterred]

3. I think he will do something for the progressive movement

that he could not do as senator. I'm looking forward to it.

[myrna minx]

2. Thank you for your service Senator.

:patriot:

[housewolf]

4. Progressives need to be excited for the 2012 election

...
I look at these Republican candidates and I know pretty well who I want to be president. You know, this is serious business, when you see what these people want to do. You give them a president, and we are really in trouble.

How should progressives relate to Obama? What's the best way to influence him?

I think we need to be very vocal. We can respect him and also indicate a desire that he move more strongly in certain areas, such as civil liberties. We can do it in a way that makes it clear we are not trying to harm the presidency but that we're trying to make sure that the base of the party and the progressive movement is motivated for this re-election. Because it needs to be. The other side is going to be very excited about 2012. I hope the White House understands that progressives have to be excited too. That will require a real effort to take some chances by moving in a more progressive manner on certain issues. I don't think we should be shy about saying that. It's not particularly helpful to talk about how we are disappointed. I don't think that accomplishes much. What we have to talk about is what the president needs to do to excite progressives. What he and his people need to recognize is the sincerity of the appeals for him to move in a more progressive direction on issues that are so important not just to progressives but to the country.

Which issues?

already, I think, has shown good instincts and good activity on money in politics. I want that to continue. But I'd like a much stronger push on civil liberties and foreign policy—in particular the Afghanistan policy. That needs to change. I continue to believe that it is a mistake to continue there, and we should be getting out. It is way too broad a commitment; it doesn't make sense to me. I feel very, very strongly about that.

...
When I said on election night, "On to 2012!" what I meant was that—for all the progressives who believe in what we have fought for, not just in recent years but for a century—nothing ended in 2010. There will be more elections. There will be more opportunities to step forward on behalf of our ideals. At some point it may include me again, but it certainly doesn't have to. I do not believe for a minute that that tradition is dead.... There is no way we're at the end of this. It will be revived, and it will prevail.

And you presume to be a part of that revival?

I very much intend to be a part of it. I guarantee I will be.

[housewolf]

5. Heart-felt and encouraging interview

Thank you for posting it. To me, Feingold's loss in Novemeber was one of the biggest tragedies of the 2010 election cycle. I'm glad to see that he remains optomistic and engaged.

[undeterred]

7. We haven't lost him just because he no longer in office.

He's a true progressive and a very wise man and that doesn't change.

[midnight]

6. Well stated... I look forward to seeing his influence the presidency,

our nation, and the world....

[northoftheborder]

8. Good article...

thanks for pointing out this article. A bit of optimism on a dreary day of news. I'm so glad Feingold is going to remain active and involved - he might be of more influence in the plans he's making. Interesting take on Obama.

[BlueMTexpat]

9. Feingold - a "maverick" in the truly admirable sense.

I am heartsick that he lost in 2010. But, in a way, he might even be able to perform better public service away from the rareified air of DC.
I wish him all the best. He is a true statesman.

[ellenfl]

10. kick for later. eom

[sabrina 1]

11. I love that he said this:

He plans to continue challenging corporate power and play a part in renewing and extending the progressive movement. He can be a real leader in helping to build such a movement. And he can probably do more outside of DC than he could while he was there.

I would love to see him run for President but the more I learn about that office, the more I think that it is not possible for anyone who might challenge the status quo to get anywhere close to it. I think you have to sign on to putting the rich first, and then you can do a few little things for the people who elected you, depending on which party you represent.

There are no 'movements' in this country. Everything is focused on two political parties and neither one cares much about the people. So if Russ can help build a real progressive movement that would be a really great way for him to use his influence.

And, maybe Grayson can join him. Maybe we can get together an alliance of the real progressives outside of DC who have power, more than they seem to have struggling against the corporate tide in DC.

[undeterred]

13. The way things are now it takes half a billion dollars

to run a presidential campaign and a million promises to the corporations to get there. Feingold knows that he cannot win at that game because he will not play it. So if he can figure out how to challenge it and change it, there are millions of us who will support him in that, because it surely needs to be changed. And not for the sake of one man, but for the sake of the country.

[Kurovski]

14. His words here...

"...money in politics is such a fundamental issue. In terms of the incredibly corrosive effect that unlimited spending by corporations has, we're just seeing the tip of the iceberg.... I think the process is being destroyed by this. Some of my future activities will involve challenging that directly."

"I don't know how it could be more stark or clear: this entire society is being dominated by corporate power in a way that may exceed what happened in the late nineteenth century, early twentieth century. The incredible power these institutions now have over the average person is just overwhelming: the way they can make these trade deals to ship people's jobs overseas, the way consumers are just brutalized and consumer protection laws are marginalized, the way this town here—Washington—has become a corporate playground. Since I've been here, this place has gone from a government town to a giant corporate headquarters."

K&R

[sabrina 1]

15. Very strong words from Russ, and truthful words.

I would love to see him build a progressive movement that has some influence. As a lone Senator, he probably didn't have much influence with little backing from his colleagues.

Sen. Dorgan might be another ally. He too has seen the same problems regarding the influence of money in DC. And he did not run again.

Grayson, Dorgan, Feingold ~ that would be a good start to start a progressive movement to try to do something concrete about what's going on with this government.

[undeterred]

16. And he is one of the very few who did not let himself be

corrupted by corporate power at all, but in fact is more determined than ever to challenge its dominance in our government.

[grahamhgreen]

12. We need him to run in 2012.

[molly77]

17. I would vote for Feingold in 2012

[Jefferson23]

18. K&R