No Labels is a growing grassroots movement group of 600,000 Republicans, Democrats and Independents in our digital network dedicated to a simple proposition: We want to help move America from the old politics of point-scoring toward a new politics of problem solving.

In Washington, DC, the most powerful interest groups work to push our leaders and our political parties apart. No Labels is different. We are the only grassroots organization in Washington, and indeed in America, that is mobilizing citizens to push our leaders to work together.

We aim to force important issues onto the public agenda and to give our leaders the space and support they need to work across the aisle to address those issues. Americans across the country want our leaders to work together, and No Labels is giving them the forum to do so.

We launched in 2010, and will convene again in 2013 to unveil new faces of this movement. Hundreds of thousands have joined us already. We need hundreds of thousands more. Will you join us?

Wanted to share this...

Don't our legislators understand that history is going to treat them badly. this will be remembered, and citizens in this country are aware of the problems. While I am hoping that the Tea Party will go back to the John Birch society and tell them time is not ready for them, I won't even hold my breath on that. The John Birch society actually thought Eisenhower was a communist spy and fluoride was brainwashing our children. It almost sounds familiar, except President Obama is biracial and is going to ruin our country, making it look like the gulags of Russia or forcing us to pledge allegiance to obama. But its the same thing. the Koch brother's Dad was a founding member of the JBS.

Needmorecoffee,

I was actually contemplating what I would have to do to create a superpac that I was intending to call 'The Coalition for Common Sense And Compromise', which would work towards the election of candidates who believe that common sense and compromise should be the standard of our elected leadership in Washington, not the extremes of either party.

It’s the dumb, ignorant, stupid, misleading, misinformed, blatant
mendacity, and just plain foolish garbage from the GOP & Tea baggers at the
microphones that insults the intelligence of all Americans with an intelligence
threshold above moron. As for the GOP Senate, knowing their antiquated ideas of economics, and social issues are contrary to the needs and rebuilding of the middle class, is nothing less than treason. The 60 vote super majority Senate rule to break a filibuster must be changed to a regular majority rule or this country should not be considered a Democracy. The minority should never have the ability to block the progress of the nation.

Gridlock is good. This may have been the best Congress ever.

Alex Wagner had Sasha Issenberg on yesterday, and he is the right guy to ask a more specific form of the question that Rachel was asking Eugene Robinson yesterday. There question is: Can't OFA be used to do exactly what it does best- that is, get people who are motivated to vote for the President's policies, to vote for members of Congress who will put those policies in place?

That is, what if OFA organizers were redeployed to all the battleground congressional districts that must be won in 2014? What if all the like minded voters in that district who voted for Obama but not for the Dem congressional candidate (EG PA 08). What if these voters were given the opportunity to register their vote on a motion before the House, and that these votes were sent to their GOP representative prior to his votes? What if they increasingly were made aware that their low opinion of Congress in general has a lot to do with the way the GOP representative is voting?

That's more than a bumper sticker. That is a devastating mechanism for giving citizens a sense of agency. It is a reminder to office holders that paying attention to lobbyists and DC pressures while ignoring communications from their constituents has consequences.

Sasha rightly pointed out on Alex's show the kind of idea that even though OFA is a good hammer, that doesn't turn every political challenge into a nail. He's right there because people are thinking about using OFA for the 19th century version of how you pressure congress that is merely updated to 21st century media. The center, center-left electorate is cynical about their chances of getting their right wing representative to pay any attention to their letters to the editor, to them or tweets, or their facebook pages.

You have to hit them were they live. Their re-election. But to do that, you must convince the voters that its not all those other BUMS in office. It's their specific Bum in office that is not listening to them.

That is the Nail that OFA is very good at hitting. Identify those persuadable people. Target them, and build up a relationship with them. The new part is that you help them engage a proto direct democracy idea. You offer the voter a chance to inform their representative how they want them to vote on a bill before their committee or on the floor of congress.

Sure, it will be expensive. But how much would you donate to see Mitch McConnell thrown out of office? How much would we donate to see Nancy back in power in the House?

What did you lose in the economic downturn, Shooter?

I now live in a different state doing a different job due to circumstances beyond my control. Watching Congress fat cats playing with facts and information, dallying with nonsensical issues, and living in their luxury while I gave up my beloved 3-bdrm ranch house to move half a country away just for work?

An obstructionist Congress doing nothing, while the people who voted for them as representation lost jobs, lost homes, and lost the pursuit of happiness is what you dub the best Congress ever?

I feel more sorry for everything you've missed, Shooter, than I even do for everything I miss.

You have a fundamental disconnect. Democrats are responsible for the crappy economy, it's called regime uncertainty. Democrats are also responsible for the financial crisis, via repeal of Glass-Steagal and leaving derivatives in the shadows. Google Robert Rubin.

Better a fundamental disconnect than a mental one, I guess....

@ John Messerly, I agree with the idea. I think we should have some online legislators sites where the citizens of their district can send messages to their legislator. Let them put up a place where the legislator can put up the bills they will be voting on, and let us have our say. If more than half of the comments say, "please vote yes." he should vote yes.

However, I remember well in 2008, John McCain was interviewed, and the interviewer said, "If 78% of your constituents want this, why do you vote against it?" His answer tells us a whole lot about the GOP, he said, "I don't care what the people want. I know what they NEED. And that's how I will vote." We might as well be children, cared for by the babysitter.

Shooter242

"Gridlock is good. This may have been the best Congress ever."

But if workers strike and protest wall mart making 5000% more than them in one productive year , the gop would demand they be arrested and fired for obstruction and creating grid lock

There are some legislators that don't care what their constituents think because there is no one challenging them every day. These legislators are in safe districts where the opposition is not organized and lacks the resources to mount a sustained challenge. Dems have abandoned the Howard Dean 50 state strategy. It is not too early for Dems to unify behind a single candidate for these safe Republican districts and begin the process of exposing the legislator's votes on important issues. The DNCC should be using its resources to register voters and help these candidates get their message out through TV ads, town hall type meetings, meet and greets, social media, etc. These candidates can make these legislators in safe districts feel insecure if public opinion is rallied on a few important issues. How many of these legislators want to face their constituents on issues like Medicare and Social Security? Republicans worked the health care issue this way in Dem districts and that created a lot of anger toward Dem legislators in some districts. The Dems have the manpower from various groups like labor and Hispanics that are willing to get involved in 2014 and upcoming state elections. It would be very simple for Obama to use his organization to begin the transition to other Dems running for office in state and federal elections. It would be a waste to let that organization wither with the Obama presidency.

Shooter, I hope you enjoyed your time in the limelight.... your GOP buddys are dwindling in number and if they don't make a fundamental change soon, your party of NO will be defunct. This is the information age... and more people are seeing thru FAUX and Limbaugh. The inherently stupid... such as yourself... are going to be real lonely.

What we need is to focus on the practical. Consider the House Battleground States (real Clear Map). We need to take back the House, and retain Senate seats. For the house, this means an offensive operation in 33 tossup seats, and 13 leans GOP seats. You probably want to actively defend the 13 leans Dem states. So this is an OFA operation in about 60 congressional districts. That is going to need a lot of dough and a lot of willingness to step outside the boundaries of accepted political behavior among Dem circles which are dominated by traditional poltical consultants who HATE OFA style politics. They hate OFA for a lot of reasons which is out of scope of this post, but the point is that it was no accident that Organizing for America went nowhere when it was transferred to the DNC.

There are a couple of practical problems with the management oversight level- The first is that the Dem party is a huge tent, and this introduces the "big committee"/ "loss of focus" challenge which inevitably will drive organizers away. For example DCCC got called on the carpet by some of the big Dem wall street donors because D-trip was getting involved advocating support for the Occupy movement. The DNC needs to be able to court the big tent donors, so the OFA thing has to be arms length from them. That is, it must be totally independent of the party. You also need an OFA that is autonomous enough to pressure the White House to advocate views the President may privately believe in, but can no longer advocate as the negotiator in chief. That means it needs to be arms length from the White House. So you need a leadership that is both charismatic and galvinising like Obama- I picture something like a small number of leaders drawn from the Progressive Caucus. Lastly, there has to be a no coordination relationship with Dem candidates in these districts due to campaign finance laws.

So this OFA like operation is run say by a triumvirate of elected members of Congress that are elected by OFA organizers in good standing. I would expect people like John Lewis, Elizabeth Warren, Joaquín Castro, Sherrod Brown, Ed Markey to be examples of the kinds of leaders elected. These folks would be involved in setting large strategic objectives, approving the tactical proposals needed (eg systems like the direct democracy vote idea) and fund raising from a national audience.

This will take a lot of dough, and it will take some charismatic leaders who have the chutzpah to ignore complaints from Dem party hacks, blue dog Dems, and big money Dem donors to stop organizing these congressional districts.

hooter (because you're only one boob)

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealedGlass-Steagall was a Republican Sponsored bill. More Republicans (207) than Democrats (155) voted for it. One the strongest voices against the bill was Sen Byron Dorgan D-ND.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/10-years-later-looking-at-repeal-of-glass-steagall/

Am I happy that Clinton signed that bill? No not at all.

Democrats are responsible for the crappy economy, it's called regime uncertainty

This doesn't make sense. On another post you stated that there exists no certainty within the market. If that is the case then you cannot create a situation of uncertainty because that is the only state that currently exists. So either you were wrong then or you're wrong now, which one is it?

Yeah, for a GOP bent on drowning government in a bathtub, doing nothing was the GOAL.

This chart would be something they'd put on their resume's to send to Grover Norquist.

I just sit and watch these videos, SMH. They seriously cannot believe what they are saying, can they? Of course, I am very far left, I am a Democratic socialist, and I am actually to the left of Jill Stein. LOL. So all these years that I thought all these conservatives are talking, they cannot be believing what they are saying, can they? Well, "yes, I guess they do."

I think Democrats should stop complaining about the radical views of the Republican right, and encourage them to take over the whole party, by 2020 we can raise tax rates to the rich by 5%, increase social security taxes by 1% which will solve the social security problem till 2065, expand Obamacare, and change election cycles for President, since we know the Democrat President is going to win we may as well do it every 8 years. As a matter of fact with Texas going blue by 2020 we may as well do not have an election, because the Democrat President candidate will start the election with 289 electoral votes. So we need more of these nuts not less, is good for Democrats.

Pride commeth before the fall

Exactly. As my whacko right-wing Faux-news cracked out Mom says, "The best congress is one that accomplishes nothing and passes no bills. The least amount of things that are accomplished in government, the better."

Well that makes perfect sense when you're the 1% and everything's going in your favor! Me, on the other hand, I'm still struggling. But when I need help... like the equal pay act being enforced at my workplace, well then, those are "gifts" bestowed by the Federal Gubment! I should not expect such luxuries!

yeh, that's a good point.

Let'a fire more of 'em!

every two years we have a change to fire some,, and in fours years we can get many more.

Well, this Congress is less popular than North Korea! What does THAT tell you? LOL. I never can believe that these people are either this stupid or narrowminded to believe what they are saying.

@Tracy

Yes, but where else can you get a work schedule of two weeks on, one week off?

In the off shore oilfield industry. Some work 7 on 7
off. Some work 14on7off, 21on14off and
28on28off. Some work about as many weeks
on and off as they can, or needed.

Then let's fire them. Show up at the polls in record numbers in mid-term and it's done.

Especially when you're sending suggestive and lude messages to your secretary!

and typically, they are the ones blaming the re-elected President for staying in "campaign mode".......

This is called "doing a Romney" on someone.

Did you not look at the chart? This takes into account both the Senate AND the House--that is what we call the CONGRESS. Also your inquiry was blatantly pointed out in the article:

"There have been plenty of other Congresses, some quite recently, with a Democratic Senate and a Republican House, but their bill totals weren't nearly this anemic."

LOOK at the chart. READ the article.

So, you do realize that Congress is made up of 2 bodies; The House of Representatives and The Senate? So, when we say 'Congress' we are automatically including both of those things. Maybe some remedial government education is in order before you go commenting on things in the open.

Pssss. The House and Senate both make up what we call congress. I failed to see anywhere in the article that specified this was about the House exclusively, otherwise it wouldn't have said congress.

The reason the earlier Congressional years got things done was because everyone was there to make things better. They actually, I believe, had the best interests of the country. surely some will get a bit jaded. But throughout our history, people were elected because they wanted to make things better. Now we have a whole bunch of people that want to make things better for THEM only.

And since Harry Reid has been making comments about reforming the filibuster, the GOP has been screaming about how damaging that would be, and how it would mean war in Congress, etc. they don't like it if they cannot filibuster everything. Well, once Reid reforms the filibuster, they can filibuster all they want. We have CSPAN now, we can watch them talk in the Senate ALL NIGHT LONG! (I love it)

It's already war in Congress. A silent war now, or a loud war with Reid, either way Congress will continue to not work on jobs or the economy or climate change or infrastructure or getting out of Afghanistan...

A war over the filibuster is at least more meaningful than the Rice Inquisition or UN conspiracy chasing.

Obstruction is McConnell's number one priority, He said~!! Errr was that making Obama a one term president? Not much difference. HUH?

I hear Mitch is now saying he will work hard on making Obama just a 2 term President. he feels he can actually pull that one off.

LOL

Well, as the saying goes, if the opposite of pro is con, the opposite of progress must be...congress.

I clicked on NPR for the first time in over two years this morning and within a minute and a half of listening, Warren Buffet was snidely called the Oracle from Omaha... I had no trouble figuring out what party the commentator supported.

I miss the old NPR. Maybe I'll give them another try in two more years...

Yes, if you make more than $200,000 you could go on the voucher system! That's what the Repubs want all of us to do. However, it should be financially progressive like the income tax scale.

try nolabel.org

The American People spoke on election day. What did the majority of Americans see that you refuse to acknowledge? Perhaps saying "President who could care less about America", shows some unrealistic distortion of your views.

Someone correct me, but wasn't the landmark ACA passed within the first two years?