The $1,000 Lunch

We are 14 months out from the 2010 elections, and despite the desire for change in Washington, it is business as usual.

Even with the deluge of anti-lobbying rhetoric and criticisms of all the political money in Washington, the city is still awash in it. Both parties are the same in their quest for more money.

This really hit home last week while at a fundraising luncheon for a newly elected Democratic Senator. It was your typical $1,000 lunch. I felt it was important to be there to support this particular member. However, the discussions did not include poverty or anything that would impact Community Action directly. There were only about 15 people there and, as normally is the case, I was the only one at the luncheon that had anything to do with low-income programs. The others around the table can only be classified as “fat cats” – representatives from the big lobbying and law firms. Few, if any, of these individuals had been interested in the focus of this member’s campaign during the past two years as we were, but now that this individual is in office, they were trying to buy their way in.

As we walked out of the luncheon, there was a homeless man just outside the door asking for money. He was obviously in difficult straits. The irony struck me intensely. I had enjoyed a $1,000 lunch not 50 feet away from a person who was trying to scrape together $2 for his next meal. This incongruity has bothered me all week.

I have adopted the approach that if you don’t support your friends or potential friends in Congress, you will never be able to successfully move your agenda. You have to participate in fund-raising in order to influence the policy side. However, I have wrestled my whole life with the questions of morality, inequity and expenditures of this kind of political system.

It is troubling to me that sometimes the special interests crowd out some of the common realities facing too many American families. There are groups, like those represented around the table that day, who can easily put together little six-figure events for members. Then, I see how hard we work to collect $20 individual donations for our CAP-PAC. Big money absolutely floods this city, and the tide is as strong against us today as it ever was.

So, yes, we paid $1,000 to support the campaign of a senator with whom we hope to work with in our mission to get this homeless person and other low-income people around the country on the Washington radar screen. We are doing everything in our power to lobby effectively and ethically, but some days I just can’t help but feel like something is wrong with the system.

-- David Bradley, Executive Director, Washington

ACORN Falls Far from the Community Action Tree

When the first stories broke about the unethical behavior of ACORN (the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now), a few conservative opinion-makers and at least one senator mistakenly linked the organization with Community Action. The negativity surrounding ACORN was so sharp, that we felt this confusion could become a significant issue.

Therefore, we surveyed the Community Action network about their relationships with ACORN. While Community Action and ACORN both target low-income populations, the survey revealed virtually no relationship. The only collaboration between Community Action Agencies and ACORN occurred with some housing projects in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina.

While the negative press generated by ACORN created a lot of reactive work for us, the silver lining is that members of Congress have been taking a broader look at services to the poor. We hope to use this opportunity to expand the conversation about domestic poverty, Community Action and how we differ from ACORN.

-- David Bradley, NCAF Executive Director, Washington

Weatherization Stimulus Continues to be a Significant Concern

The U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report last week on stimulus spending and, as expected, weatherization stimulus spending was criticized.

National Community Action Foundation has been gauging responses to the report from the media, Congress and Administration. So far, the damage is manageable. Those who are alarmed by the lack of spending in a number of stimulus programs tend to be the ones who opposed the stimulus from the beginning. Those who supported the stimulus are privately saying that they expected a few speed bumps as we ramped up the weatherization program.

However, if the statistics do not significantly improve by the end of the year, this could become really damaging for the Community Action network. While the GAO points a finger clearly at the feds, and somewhat at the states, in the end I am worried that weatherization’s local providers will take all the heat.

-- David Bradley, NCAF Executive Director, Washington

CSBG Stimulus Still Not Flowing in Some States

As I was speaking in Philadelphia last week, I asked the roomful of Community Action Agency representatives for a show of hands who had received Community Services Block Grant stimulus dollars. Only about 10 percent of the room raised their hands!

It is extremely disappointing to me that CSBG stimulus dollars still have not flowed down to many CAAs! I hope I am wrong, but I think this will end up hurting the Community Action network.

I get asked all the time about these stimulus dollars. I am operating under the assumption that very little of the money allocated has trickled down to the local level for various reasons. I don’t have a handle on why or the grand total, although I am continually inquiring about this.

Please let me know if CSBG stimulus dollars are circulating in your states yet or not.

-- David Bradley, NCAF Executive Director, Washington

NCAF-ExxonMobil Weatherization Partnership Update

There were 101 letters of intent submitted for the NCAF-ExxonMobil weatherization training partnership grants. I am gratified that both the response level and quality of submissions were high.

The project advisory council will now review the submissions to choose the finalists. We will be announcing grantees during the 2009 Combined Community Investment Futures & National Community Action Foundation Energy Conference, Nov. 1-6 in St. Petersburg, Fla.

-- David Bradley, NCAF Executive Director, Washington

Partisanship & Politics

I have made a number of speeches since Obama’s health-care speech before a joint session of Congress. The primary question I have gotten since that time is about the infamous “You lie!” comment made by Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC). I have also spoken with a number of Democratic members since that event, and I think that some – certainly not all – members are misreading the public’s mood about this.

I hope that the vote taken yesterday to formally rebuke Rep. Wilson signals the end. However, I don’t think it will end any time soon for bloggers and talk radio.

I really think that the general public wants to move on from that issue. Most of the country is more interested in when jobs are going to return, when the economy is going to get better, and the likely outcome of the health care debates. The quicker we get this debacle behind us, the better. Both Republican and Democratic citizens want to turn the page and move on.

A number of the “Tea Party Patriots” were handing out brochures on the Hill yesterday. As was seen during their march on Saturday, this group is very energized and motivated. I believe they are providing a lot of fuel and troops for Republicans, and I think Democrats may be underestimating their potential impact.

I have been in several political discussions about the 50-state political landscape and what is going on out there. The polls and public support for the parties has clearly tightened.

It is interesting that both parties at all levels -- gubernatorial, House and Senate – are focused on how Florida will vote in 2010 as the bellwether for 2012 elections.

Another factor everyone is discussing is the impact Obama will have on the 2010 elections. I am sensing some Democrats are surprised at how much President Obama has fallen in his approval ratings. The so-called “Obama Effect” may be less than Democrats had hoped and less than Republicans feared. They just don’t see that ability to mobilize hundreds of thousands of voters in 2010, let alone 2012, like candidate Obama was able to in 2008.

I personally think we will be surprised at voter turnout and a few key congressional upsets in the midterm elections.

Stay tuned.

-- David Bradley, NCAF Executive Director, Washington