PCCC

Earlier this month, after President Obama struck a deal with Republicans to avert the fiscal cliff, a top official from a leading liberal organization accused the president of being “clueless about how to use leverage in a negotiation.” Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, lamented in an interview with The New York Times, “Republicans publicly admitted they lost the tax debate and would be forced to cave, yet the president just kept giving stuff away.” But on Wednesday, Green and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, as well as a host of other like-minded groups that have not been shy about criticizing the president and challenging mainstream Democratic orthodoxy, were singing a far different tune. Stephanie Taylor, another co-founder of the liberal advocacy organization, offered support for the new gun control proposals unveiled at the White House just more than a month after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. “We applaud the White House plan to think big and take bold action against gun killings,” Taylor said in a statement. “The PCCC is all in for this fight, investing time and money in Republican and Democratic districts until Congress passes major gun legislation that includes an assault weapons ban.” The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is one of several groups that broke with the president during the recent fiscal cliff standoff, but are now standing ready to unleash their troops of grassroots activists as his administration pursues changes to the nation’s firearm laws.

Grassroots progressive groups pledged to get behind the gun violence prevention plan proposed by President Obama Wednesday. Less than an hour after Obama announced a sweeping plan to prevent gun deaths, including proposals to ban high-capacity magazines and so-called assault weapons as well as universal background checks for firearms purchases that require Congressional approval, progressive groups promised to use their sway to push the measures on Capitol Hill… The Progressive Change Campaign Committee also signed on to Obama’s legislative push on gun control. “The PCCC is all in for this fight, investing time and money in Republican and Democratic districts until Congress passes major gun legislation that includes an assault weapons ban,” said Stephanie Taylor, a co-founder of the group.

Progressive activists fired a shot across the bow of congressional Democrats on Wednesday, warning them to protect Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid or face a primary challenge. Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said Democrats would face a “nuclear war on the left” if they supported cuts to the safety net programs. “We will probably have a fractured party for the next two years” if Democrats cave to Republican demands, Green said on CSPAN, “which would be to the detriment of this president and very unfortunate. There will absolutely be Democratic primaries in the next round of congressional elections. We would probably start right away recruiting challengers.”

The liberal advocacy group that helped draft Elizabeth Warren into the US Senate campaign in 2011 is now trying to make Barney Frank her junior senator. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent an email to 25,000 Massachusetts members Wednesday afternoon asking them to sign an online petition urging Governor Deval Patrick to appoint Frank as the state’s interim senator. The group also launched a website, AppointBarneyFrank.com.

Adam Green talked about the work of his Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and the organization’s agenda for the 113th Congress.*He also outlined what progressives would like to see from President Obama in his second term.

When Massachusetts Democrat Elizabeth Warren and the rest of the 2013 class of liberal senators start work this month, they’ll have to do more than figure out the byzantine ways of getting things done in Washington. They’ll also have to decide how seriously to engage a progressive movement that sees their assent a historic opportunity to shift the Democratic Party to the left.

“The cavalry is arriving,” said Adam Green, cofounder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “A lot of news coverage after the election focused on Democrats winning two seats, but the big story for us is the composition of the Democratic caucus has moved in a massively progressive direction.”

The criticism from the left mirrors past complaints when Mr. Obama included tax cuts in his stimulus package, gave up on a government-run option in health care negotiations and temporarily extended Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy two years ago. Liberals said Mr. Obama should have capitalized on his re-election victory and the expiration on New Year’s Day of all of the Bush tax cuts to force Republicans to accept his terms. “The president remains clueless about how to use leverage in a negotiation,” said Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a liberal advocacy organization. “Republicans publicly admitted they lost the tax debate and would be forced to cave, yet the president just kept giving stuff away.”

The White House is moving towards strikingAi??a deal that would only end the Bush tax cuts on incomes above $400,000 while enacting a watered-down estate tax. These measures offer a major tax cut to the rich over what is currently set to take place in 2013.

Major progressive groups denounced this proposal in statements and emails today.

Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC):

Ai??On behalf of nearly a million progressives nationwide, we wanted to emphasize that this is a moment to stand on principle.

There has always been room for negotiation, but throughout this debate progressives have had 2 bright-line positions: Tax rates on those making $250,000 must go up to at least the Clinton rates and there must be no cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security benefits.

The president ran on and won on $250,000 twice. Voters across the country overwhelmingly agree with the $250,000 threshold (seeAi??http://2014polling.com). And in real human costs, the billions lost by raising the threshold to $400,000 will come out of the pockets of grandparents and working families across the nation. Meanwhile, individuals making over $30,000 per month would get a tax break.

Democrats hold the cards, and our leverage increases in less than 10 hours if we hold strong.

The public is paying attention, and we urge all Democrats to stand on principle at this moment.Ai??The current deal violates progressive principles.Ai??It should be opposed. — Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, PCCC co-founders

MoveOn (excerpt from e-mail to members):

MoveOn members have consistently stood behind President Obama’s campaign pledge to return the tax rates for the wealthiest Americansai??i??those making more than $250,000 a yearai??i??to what they were under President Clinton. A last-minute deal like the one reported in the press could make the Bush Tax Cuts permanent for those making $450,000 a year.

When Republicans tried to cut …

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent an email to Democratic senior staffers in both the House and Senate at 3 p.m. ET Monday, after word trickled out that a deal in the works would only raise taxes for households making $450,000 and above (or $400,000 for individuals.) The email, obtained by TPM, argued that Democrats have no practical reason to cave on taxes and would actually have increased leverage if Congress blows through the midnight deadline to avoid the cliff. “Democrats hold the cards, and our leverage increases in less than 10 hours if we hold strong,” the email, signed by the group’s co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, read.

Preserving Social Security should never have been all that difficult.

But it took Harry Reid to settle the issue —at least as regards the miserably long and absurdly inappropriate debate of 2012.

“We’re not going to have any Social Security cuts,” the Senate majority leader said on the floor of the chamber Sunday. “It’s just doesn’t seem appropriate at this time.”… The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which did so much to strengthen the backbones of Reid and other Democrats, responded in with the proper mix of celebration and resolve. “Democrats stood firm — and Harry Reid declared from the Senate floor that no deal would pass this year that touched Social Security,” declared PCCC co-founders Stephanie Taylor and Adam Green in a message to the hundreds of thousands of PCCC members who contacted Congress with messages opposing any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits. “Today’s victory shows that activism works. In 2013, we’ll keep fighting any proposed cuts to these benefits.”

Social Security was worth fighting for in 2012.

And because activists prevailed—with an assist from Harry Reid—it will be worth fighting for in 2013.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is urging Democrats to hold their “bright line position” on taxes and entitlements ahead of a meeting Friday in which President Obama will reportedly offer congressional leaders a scaled-back deal to avert the fiscal cliff.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee says a majority of House Democrats have pledged to vote against any budget deal that includes the “chained CPI” Social Security cut. The PCCC’s conclusion is based on a count of signatures on a 2011 letter and a statement from the Congressional Progressive Caucus this week.

Outside liberal groups are keeping up pressure on Democrats to ward off a deal that includes any changes to Social Security. Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, threatened primary challenges for Democratic lawmakers flirting with supporting the CPI change and warned that progressives were already getting mobilized to lobby members. “People are under the kind of delusional idea that the American public would applaud cutting their own grandparents’ Social Security benefits because compromise is just that important,” Green said in an interview. “Well, it’s not. There’s a good compromise and a bad compromise.”

Stephanie Taylor, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said the chained CPI plan is “unacceptable.” A labor source called it “insanity.” As Matt Yglesias pointed out this morning, the chained CPI is also unpopular, with 60 percent opposed to “changing Social Security to increase at a slower rate” and only 34 percent in favor.

The liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) on Tuesday morning circulated criticism from a handful of progressive players, signifying that politicians and interest groups on the left, who have decried any cuts to Social Security or Medicare, will coordinate at least some degree of pushback against this movement toward a compromise.

When Warren laid out the approach in a debate with departing Sen. Scott Brown during the campaign, it instantly entered the progressive canon… And the plan has widespread support beyond just liberals, progressives argue. Case in point, the PCCC polled voters in two swing states (Virginia and New Hampshire), and in Obama’s home state of Illinois, about Warren’s plan. The poll, conducted by PPP and shared with Salon before its release, didn’t mention Warren’s name, but asked about individual components. All had broad support.

A coalition of liberal groups this week delivered petitions with more than 21,000 names to Villaraigosa’s office, demanding that he resign from the Campaign to Fix the Debt, which those on the left consider to be a right-wing plot to slash Social Security, Medicare and other social service and support programs, and protect the wealthy against tax increases. Move.on, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and the California-based Courage Campaign are joining forces to pressure Villaraigosa, as detailed in this item on the Calitics website.

In a sign that progressive push-back against Los Angeles Mayor Villariagosa’s membership in the right-wing “Fix The Debt” lobbying group isn’t abating, activists from MoveOn.org and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered over 21,000 signatures to LA City Hall this afternoon demanding Villariagosa resign from the group’s steering committee.

The following poll numbers (also see the “flip” for more) come from Public Policy Polling, for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC). A few interesting findings that jumped out at me are: 1) Bob McDonnell within 4 points of Mark Warner for U.S. Senate in 2014; 2) any support by Sen. Warner for cutting Medicare and/or Medicaid, including raising the retirement age, would make 33% of voters “less likely” to vote for him (vs. 22% who say “more likely”); and 3) Virginia voters believe President Obama’s mandate in this election is far more to focus on jobs (46%) than on the debt (22%).

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.

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.

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.