Press Coverage

Voters in Virginia, Illinois and New Hampshire favor raising marginal tax rates on income over $250,000 by almost two-thirds in each state, according to new polling data from Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling and commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee provided to TPM.

The truth is that on every prominent economic issue of our time, the public overwhelmingly agrees with the progressive position. If 74 percent of voters oppose cuts to Medicare benefits and only 17 percent support them (which is true in New Hampshire), progressives insisting on the 74 percent position is different than the Tea Party insisting on the 17 percent position. One is democracy. The other is fringe incalcitrance. Equating the two is either ignorant or dishonest, but in either case destructive. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee did our homework and hired the No. 1 most-accurate pollster of 2012, Public Policy Polling, to poll New Hampshire voters on these fiscal issues (with more states to come). As the Union Leader’s John DiStaso reported, huge majorities of voters in the “Live Free Or Die” state support taxing the rich, oppose cutting benefits, and support cutting corporate welfare. They also say that President Obama’s mandate is not to compromise for its own sake, but to “stand up for regular families – even if that means fighting.” That’s a mandate – a mandate for “the left.” The only question is whether Democrats will use it to fight for the will of the people.

In a story already making waves across Washington, Politico’s Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen reported this morning that a bipartisan “grand bargain” is emerging from talks between the White House and Republicans. The contours of the deal are this: About $1.2 trillion in new tax revenue, most likely from an rate increase on income over $250,000, along with at least $400 billion over 10 years in entitlement cuts “and perhaps a lot more,” mostly from Medicare.

Liberals have drawn a hard line against entitlement cuts and $400 billion is a lot of money, so some progressives are not pleased with the idea….However, there’s an important caveat that’s missing from the deal described by Politico… The details of the cuts in the Politico article were vague, and it’s unclear if they represents real cuts to benefits or not. “That’s a crucial distinction,” said Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “What’s worried some about the Politico article is that it kind of tossed in reforms or efficiencies along with talk about raising the Medicare retirement age or adjusting the cost of living adjustment — those two things would essentially start a nuclear war on the left,” Green said. “Those are the two big things. Those are benefit cuts. Those actively hurt seniors.” But Green said he was encouraged by Durbin’s speech yesterday, and he doesn’t think raising the retirement age is a real possibility.

The poll gave strong indication that Granite Staters oppose cuts to Medicare and Medicaid benefits and support higher taxes for the rich. If Shaheen supported cuts to Medicare of Medicaid, 46 percent said they would be less likely to vote for her, while 35 percent said it would not make a difference, 13 percent said they would be more likely to vote for her and 7 percent were not sure, according to the poll. If Shaheen “led the national fight to raise taxes on the rich,” 48 percent said they would be more likely to vote for her, while 31 percent said they would be less likely to vote for her, 19 percent said it would not make a difference and 1 percent said they were not sure.

A new Democratic poll set to be released later Tuesday shows one way that lawmakers can start sketching out a so-called “balanced approach” to averting the fiscal cliff that could gain the support of voters. Proposals to reduce spending on the military, cut some agriculture subsidies, and eliminate subsidies to oil companies would all win public backing by large margins, according to the poll conducted for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, obtained by POLITICO. More specifically, the poll found that 53 percent of voters would support defense cuts, 79 percent would back cutting subsidies to agriculture corporations and 80 percent would favor getting rid of the oil subsidies. It surveyed voters in New Hampshire, a key swing state. Those policy measures polled by the PCCC came in part from Elizabeth Warren, the Democratic senator-elect from Massachusetts. During her campaign, Warren called for a “balanced approach” that would include trimming agriculture subsidies and cutting the budget to the Pentagon, as well higher taxes on the wealthy.

A left-leaning poll of New Hampshire voters offers some advice to the next person in New Hampshire’s political cross hairs: Jeanne Shaheen. Shaheen, a Democrat, has to defend her U.S. Senate seat in 2014. Trying to unseat her will no doubt be the top priority of New Hampshire Republican leaders as they try to recover from disappointment at the polls earlier this month. The Progressive Campaign Change Committee surveyed Granite Staters on issues that sprang from the 2012 campaign… The findings confirm the group’s belief that a majority of New Hampshire voters clearly want Shaheen to continue to support ending the Bush tax cuts for wealthy individuals and small-business owners on Jan. 1. A clear majority also said they would oppose making significant changes to benefits given to seniors who receive Social Security or Medicare. Sixty-six percent supported raising taxes for those earning more than $250,000 a year, with 29 percent opposed to it. Only 13 percent wanted to cut spending on Social Security, and 17 percent had the stomach for reducing Medicare obligations.

A new poll of New Hampshire by Democratic-affiliated Public Policy Polling showed that nearly half of all voters there — 49 percent — say President Obama’s mandate following his reelection is to focus on jobs. That’s compared to only 22 percent of voters who say the president’s mandate involved reducing the debt. In the same survey, only 36 percent of respondents said that the president was tasked with striking a compromise with congressional Republicans. Voters were more likely to say that the president’s mandate was to stand up for middle-class families, even if that meant a confrontation over the fiscal cliff of tax hikes and spending cuts. “The mandate of 2012 was clear. Tax the rich, use that money to invest in jobs, and do not cut Social Security and Medicare benefits for regular people,” said Progressive Change Campaign Committee co-founder Adam Green in a statement. “Americans want President Obama to fight for them if the Republicans stand in the way, not settle for a bad compromise.”

November 6 was “probably one of the best election nights progressives will ever have,” says Adam Green, cofounder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “Underlying the fact that Democrats picked up a few seats is that the progressive ranks are growing while the Blue Dogs are dwindling.” Progressive advocates believe these new faces will lead to more favorable policies out of Congress… But the progressives also make a political argument. For years, they’ve claimed that Democrats need to be more progressive, not less, if they want to win elections. The idea that tacking to the middle and embracing center-right positions is what wins, they say, is a canard. Now, they point to the 2012 results as proof.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi announced Wednesday that she will stay on as House Democratic leader in the next Congress… Liberal groups, which have been wary that Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.), the Democratic whip who was expected to replace Pelosi had she stepped down, would be too quick to cut entitlement programs in order to solidify a bipartisan deficit deal, were quick to cheer her decision. “Thank you, thank you, thank you, Nancy Pelosi,” Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said Wednesday in an email. “The mandate of the election was to tax the rich and protect programs like Medicare and Social Security from benefit cuts. Steny Hoyer would likely not have respected that mandate, but given her track record, we have high hopes for Nancy Pelosi.”

A prominent liberal group launched a last-minute campaign urging Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) to stay on as the top House Democrat next year… The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), a Washington-based liberal advocacy group, sent out a notice at 11 p.m. Tuesday night warning that, if Pelosi steps down, “a conservative Democrat will take over.” Although the PCCC email doesn’t name names, the reference likely is to Rep. Steny Hoyer (Md.), the Democratic whip who’s expected to replace Pelosi if she steps down. As highlighted by the PCCC, many liberals fear Hoyer will be too quick to cut programs like Medicare and Social Security for the sake of reaching a deficit deal with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and the Republicans.

Led by the AFL-CIO, the progressives have presented a united front on two basic demands: No cuts to entitlement programs, and no reauthorization of the Bush tax cuts for higher income brackets. “If it’s bad for workers, it doesn’t matter to us who proposes it. We won’t be on board. We won’t be taken for granted,” Richard Trumka, the AFL-CIO’s president recently told Salon’s Josh Eidelson. “Some people in the White House think that compromise and bipartisanship for its own sake is a principle the American people will admire,” said Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which boosts liberals in primary fights against moderate Democrats. “But there’s good compromises and there’s bad compromises, and if he cuts Social Security or Medicare, that would just be a huge betrayal of the mandate the American people gave him.” Green said his group would “absolutely” mobilize against the president, including running TV ads, if it looks like he’s going to cut a bad deal. During a previous fight with Congress over taxes in 2010, the PCCC ran TV ads hitting Obama by merely repeating his own words opposing the Bush tax cuts.

In this week’s installment of Break Room, political columnist Michelle Cottle talks with Adam Green, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, about what Petraeus’ scandal might mean for Obama’s meeting with progressive groups on Tuesday.

Created in 2009, PCCC supports unabashedly left-wing candidates with dollars and operations help—a busy, if quiet, liberal answer to the Tea Party movement. But while the collective Tea Party shriek seemed to blow itself out around the time of the Republican primaries and lost ground in last week’s elections, PCCC’s star is rising… And then, exhausted, they watched the results come in. Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts. Tammy Baldwin in Wisconsin. Sherrod Brown in Ohio. One after another, 30 Senate and House candidates PCCC had put its weight behind became victors. Far from resting on its laurels, Taylor said PCCC is readying for a fight against expected attempts to cut Medicare funding during the coming lame duck session of Congress, and they’re scouting for a new crop of progressive candidates.

One organization that immediately offered comment on the way it influenced the 2nd Congressional District race was the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. The organization is being credited for assisting Kuster’s effort this year, helping her raise nearly $240,000 from donors in New Hampshire and nationally. The organization also made more than 275,000 calls for Kuster in both 2010 and 2012, and had volunteers on the ground assisting the campaign, according to T. Neil Sroka, the press secretary, for the organization.

Sroka noted that Kuster, on a conference call, credited the org as an “integral” to her team as “invaluable to the cause of bold progressives.”

Warren, a Harvard University law professor, has become a liberal darling in her first race for elected office. She helped President Obama create the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and won a featured speaking slot at the Democratic convention in Charlotte. “Progressives just won our marquee race of 2012 and elected a leader who will shake up the corridors of power from Washington to Wall Street,” said Stephanie Taylor, co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, one of Warren’s earliest supporters. The group raised more than $1 million for Warren.

The president’s former advisor and the conceptual founder of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Elizabeth Warren is now the Democrats’ candidate for senate in Massachusetts. Her campaign has become a second rallying point for politically-concerned celebrities — and in a new spot from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, Massachusetts native Ben Affleck sings the Harvard professor’s praises.

But ultimately, Obama cannot implement a deal alone. He has to get members of his own party to vote for it in Congress—so regardless of the president’s disposition, there are many pressure points in Congress for progressives who want to keep Democrats from cutting the safety net. To that end, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee has been seeking out Democrats running in tough races and getting them on board with a no-cuts agenda, in exchange for valuable financial and logistical support. At least eight House candidates are receiving PCCC support, along with four Senators or Senate candidates: Sen. Sherrod Brown, Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, and now Representative Shelley Berkley, whom PCCC endorsed on Monday. On a call with volunteers this week—joined, quite notably, by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid—Berkley re-stated her position on safety net cuts: “I will promise you without fear of contradiction, I will do everything in my power to strengthen and protect Medicare and Social Security and it’s going to be a cold day in the middle of August in the Nevada desert before I do anything that’s going to harm those two essential programs.”

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a Washington, D.C.-based liberal advocacy group and a federally registered political action committee, says it made 8,000 calls to Vermonters on Sunday on behalf of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Peter Shumlin and Democratic treasurer candidate Beth Pearce. The calls were part of the committee’s “Call out the Vote” campaign in which members of PCCC are trying to reach out to one million Americans with advice about federal and state candidates to support.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is using a combination of a paid call center and a predictive dialing system for volunteers in order to meet a goal of at least one million calls on behalf of progressive candidates, the group’s organizers say. “What we wanted to do here is to set up a system where we can take the scale of the national volunteer program, and still operate it with the level of focus and volunteer cultivation that you would normally get with physical offices, face-to-face,” said Michael Snook, the PCCC’s chief information officer.

Commissioned by the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a liberal political action committee based in Washington, D.C., is being used not only to tout the electoral benefits of a ‘D,’ but to show broad support generally among Vermonters for one of the party’s defining policies: single-payer health care. The poll found that 53 percent of Vermonters “approve of Vermont going forward with Green Mountain Care, a single-payer health care system that will guarantee coverage for everyone in the state.” The survey found that 38 percent disapprove.

On the eve of today’s 10th anniversary of the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone (D-Minn.), family, friends, former Congressional colleagues and average Americans who were touched by Wellstone’s work gathered on a conference call to share their memories of one of the icons of the progressive movement, vowing to continue to champion the causes he fought so hard for… This is a person who understood his moral compass,” Progressive Change Campaign Committee Co-Founder Adam Green said on the call. “And even when he was an isolated voice in an out of touch Senate, he voted his conscience and was very much the tip of a spear of an entire movement across this country.”

Cravaack’s opponent, Rick Nolan, is getting a boost from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee in the form of phonebanking. The group has placed 11,108 phone calls to voters on behalf of Nolan, according to a press release.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is up with a new ad in New Hampshire’s 2nd District for Dem Carol Shea-Porter that provides a good example of how progressives should message around Medicare and the safety net in general.

PCCC plans to make hundreds of thousands of calls for Elizabeth Warren’s Massachusetts Senate race. Another top priority is Alan Grayson’s House race in Florida. Call Out The Vote will also help Sen. Sherrod Brown’s re-election effort in Ohio and Tammy Baldwin’s Senate campaign in Wisconsin. On the House side, calls will go out for Rob Zerban, who is trying unseat Paul Ryan, Annie Kuster’s campaign in New Hampshire, and several other progressive candidates.

Bold Progressives, a Democratic action organization that’s almost a million members strong, has created a great get out the vote (GOTV) campaign targeting essential election races. It’s called “Call Out The Vote” and you can get involved by helping to make calls to critical voters in key elections.