Text 28627, 173 rader
Skriven 2007-05-05 22:06:00 av Jeff Binkley (1:226/600)
Ärende: Dems
============
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/06/washington/06left.html?ei=5065&en=b5bd469d4cf
491ae&ex=1179028800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print

May 6, 2007
With New Clout, Antiwar Groups Push Democrats
By MICHAEL LUO
WASHINGTON, May 4  Every morning, representatives from a cluster of antiwar
groups gather for a conference call with Democratic leadership staff members in
the House and the Senate.

Shortly after, in a cramped meeting room here, they convene for a call with
organizers across the country. They hash out plans for rallies. They sketch out
talking points for rapid response news conferences. They discuss polls they
have conducted in several dozen crucial Congressional districts and states
across the country.

Over the last four months, the Iraq deliberations in Congress have lurched from
a purely symbolic resolution rebuking the presidents strategy to timetables for
the withdrawal of American troops. Behind the scenes, an elaborate political
operation, organized by a coalition of antiwar groups and fine-tuned to wrestle
members of Congress into place one by one, has helped nudge the debate forward.

But there are tensions in the relationship between the groups, which banded
together earlier this year under the umbrella of Americans Against Escalation
in Iraq, and the Democratic leadership. The fissures could be magnified in
coming weeks as the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, and the Senate
majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, struggle to cobble together a strategy
after President Bushs veto of the $124 billion Iraq spending bill that tied the
money to a timetable for withdrawal.

On Thursday, leaders of the liberal group MoveOn.org, including Tom Matzzie,
the groups Washington director who also serves as the campaign manager for the
coalition, sent a harshly worded warning to the Democratic leadership.

In the past few days, we have seen what appear to be trial balloons signaling a
significant weakening of the Democratic position, the letter read. On this, we
want to be perfectly clear: if Democrats appear to capitulate to Bush  passing
a bill without measures to end the war  the unity Democrats have enjoyed and
Democratic leadership has so expertly built, will immediately disappear.

The letter went on to say that if Democrats passed a bill without a timeline
and with all five months of funding, they would essentially be endorsing a war
without end. MoveOn, it said, will move to a position of opposition.

The antiwar coalition combines the online mobilization capabilities of MoveOn
with the old-school political muscle of organized labor. They have been working
in tandem with Democratic leadership in both the House and the Senate on a
systematic strategy to unify Democrats, divide Republicans and isolate the
president.

The alliance, including MoveOn, chose to stick with Ms. Pelosi as she ushered
through a war financing bill that included a timeline for withdrawal, but many
peace advocates called the measure too timid. Some critics accused the alliance
of becoming too cozy with the Democratic leadership and selling out the cause.

Theres a dividing line between those groups who feel the most important thing
is to be clear on bringing the troops home as soon as possible, and the groups
that feel that unity within the Democratic Party is most important and the most
important thing is for the Democrats to win the White House, said Medea
Benjamin, a co-founder of Code Pink, an antiwar group that is not part of the
alliance. So the groups who feel the most important thing is to win the White
House would naturally be more inclined to listening to Speaker Nancy Pelosi
when she says the only way we can get a vote through is if we water it down.

Many of the major players in Americans Against Escalation in Iraq earned their
stripes not from sit-ins, marches and other acts of civil disobedience but as
Democratic operatives on Capitol Hill and in political campaigns. The
sophisticated political operation they have built is a testament to how far the
antiwar movement has come since the Vietnam era.

But Tom Andrews, a former Democratic congressman from Maine and the national
director of Win Without War, a member of the coalition, said there existed a
healthy tension between working closely with Democratic lawmakers on Capitol
Hill, many of whom were former colleagues and friends, and continuing to prod
them to end the war.

Our constituency is the people across this country who want to shut this war
down, Mr. Andrews said. Its not the Democratic Party.

Mr. Matzzie underscored the coalitions approach to a roomful of members on
Thursday at the outset of a planning retreat at the headquarters of the Service
Employees International Union here.

The principle under which weve been operating is more like a political
campaign, Mr. Matzzie said. The central strategy is creating that toxic
environment for people who want to continue this debacle.

The discussion at the retreat mirrored that of planning meetings for
traditional political campaigns, with presentations on polling, strategy and
field operations.

Its no different than if you went over to the offices of Clinton for President,
Obama for President, Giuliani for President, said Brad Woodhouse, president of
Americans United for Change, which has roots in organized labor and came out of
the legislative battle over social security in 2005.

The coalition, which has raised $7.1 million since January, has concentrated
its activities on 57 House districts and senators in nine states, places where
they believe Republican lawmakers face tough races in 2008 or have shown signs
of wavering in their support for the president.

The service employees union has mobilized its phone bank in New York City and
asked local leaders to call members of Congress. Leaders of the union, long
closely allied with liberal lawmakers, helped assuage many progressives who
were uneasy about voting for the war-financing bill, fearing criticism from the
left.

The National Security Network, a collection of liberal-leaning military and
foreign policy experts headed by Rand Beers, former national security adviser
to the presidential campaign of Senator John Kerry, has deployed former
generals and officials to persuade individual lawmakers.

The coalitions influence comes from its connections on Capitol Hill and
political shrewdness, as well as its grass-roots reach. The whole movement has
updated themselves to be where campaign-style politics are generally, said
Stephanie Cutter, a Democratic strategist. Theyre just incredibly savvy,
tactically and politically. They know how to use the news cycle.

Most important for lawmakers, said Mr. Andrews, the former congressman from
Maine, the coalition members are committed to using their resources to changing
the political climate in their districts, which gives them credibility on
Capitol Hill.

We want members of Congress to do the right thing and do very well as a result,
he said. Were not just there asking them to do the right thing without fully
recognizing the task we have on hand.

Rodell Mollineau, a spokesman for Mr. Reids office, said the coalition
amplifies what Democrats are trying to do in Washington to end the war.

It helps us reverberate a unified message outside the Beltway, he said. These
groups give voice to a message were trying to get outside.

One of the coalitions strengths is its diversity, bringing to together groups
like MoveOn.org and organized labor on one end and former Iraq veterans in the
group Votevets.org on the other, members said. But that diversity can also
create some tense moments, as each of the groups have different constituencies
and some of the groups are more invested in the Democratic Party than others.

But the organizations came together based on a sense of pragmatism, said Mr.
Woodhouse, of Americans United for Change, that were better fighting together
than fighting apart.

After the presidents veto this week, the coalition organized 358 rallies and
more than 20 news conferences across the country. Organizers had met with
leadership staff members the week before to coordinate.

On Friday, in a daily conference call, Tara McGuinness, the coalitions deputy
campaign manager, told members that leadership aides had expressed gratitude
for the work, saying it had helped bolster members of their caucus.

Ms. McGuiness also told them that she had received assurances from leadership
staff members that all options were still being considered for the new version
of the war spending bill.

The latest word from them is they are talking more and more about a short-leash
option, she said, referring to a plan in the House that would finance the war
for only about three more months and require the administration to report back
on progress being made by the Iraqi government. Congress would then vote again
on the rest of the money requested by Mr. Bush.

Members of the Senate appear to be cool to the idea, but it has currency among
some liberal advocates and members of the coalition.

Mr. Matzzie, of MoveOn, was clear about the stakes in the coming weeks, saying
his group was only getting started. He emphasized that the next emergency
spending bill must be one to end the war.

This is act one of a three-act play, he said. Act two will be the summer.
During the summer, our job is to create a firestorm of opposition.

--- PCBoard (R) v15.3/M 10
 * Origin:  (1:226/600)