Abundance in the age of revolt
Advocates face a choice between a public, mass movement and an elite-driven “Secret Congress” approach.
Note: Thanks to the 180 people who tuned in yesterday for our webinar on evidence-based policymaking, and to the amazing speakers who shared their insights. If you missed it, check out the recording here.
Martin Gurri’s Revolt of the Public neatly delivers a thesis that many in politics and policy have long observed. In short, since the dawn of the digital age, the public, armed with devices of mass communication and the internet, has acquired unprecedented power to disrupt the political process. The failures of government and our elected officials are on display more starkly. When everyone has the ability to be a news source through social media, the bastions of traditional media can no longer control narratives and sway public opinion as they did before.
When combined with intense partisan polarization, this potential for public intervention is profoundly threatening to lawmakers. Ironically, the era of transparency has thus encouraged legislating through the so-called “Secret Congress.” As Matt Yglesias and Simon Bazelon write, mass attention on major bills is now often a detriment to their chances of passing. “Public attention creates incredibly perverse incentives,” they write. When bills are seen as factional fights, they explain, parties are less willing to cede ground to the other in negotiations so as not to be seen as giving the enemy a “win.” Conversely, though, when legislation can be formulated outside the public light, parties are more willing to compromise, leading to quiet consensus. When the legislation finally does reach the public, that pre-built consensus whisks the bill through both chambers before the forces of media scrutiny and polarization can sully the process.
Abundance agenda advocates should deeply consider how the public has received the Biden agenda, much of which has embodied their values.
The Secret Congress has become an enduring feature of lawmaking. As Russell Berman details in the Atlantic, legislation to reform the Postal Service, ban forced arbitration for workplace sexual harassment and assault claims, and reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act was deliberately negotiated out of the media spotlight.
As advocates for an “abundance agenda” begin to plot their political strategy, there is a directional choice to be made between a public, mass movement and an elite-driven Secret Congress approach. There are clear advantages to the latter strategy. As Rob Saldin and Steve Teles suggest, elites may be able to connect abundance agenda priorities to other, mainstream party issues. That way, pro-abundance reforms can be the antidote to ills such as high cost-of-living, crumbling infrastructure, patchy healthcare access, and more. Such a strategy has clear appeal, but there are numerous pitfalls along the way as well.
First, as the success of Secret Congress demonstrates, elite-driven persuasion only goes so far once public scrutiny begins. The federal component of the abundance agenda is unlikely to be a one-and-done legislative package. Rather, it will be a series of bills, or a framework that guides a Congress or presidency. Therefore, it is unlikely that the entire agenda can be shepherded through an elite-driven “Secret Congress” without landing on the public’s and media’s radar at some point. Whether the reception will be positive or negative is impossible to tell, but if recent polarization is an indicator, it is very possible that some elected officials will attack the abundance agenda for alleged sins such as environmental deregulation, government overspending, or something entirely novel.
The long time horizon for many abundance initiatives to produce tangible results may give pause to ambitious legislators who are thinking of investing their political capital..
We should also temper our expectations for public enthusiasm to inoculate against such attacks. Abundance agenda advocates should deeply consider how the public has received the Biden agenda, much of which has embodied many of the values of abundance. Contrary to the hopes of Democrats, President Biden has received relatively little credit from voters for his legislative accomplishments.
There are many theories as to why President Biden sits at historically low approval ratings. One underexplored explanation is that his agenda has largely rested on legislation that will take years to bear fruit. The Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law make historic investments in clean energy, infrastructure, and more. If the estimates are correct, in decades, these laws will be seen as turning points for the United States. But as of this writing, President Biden has little to show for these accomplishments. Infrastructure and clean energy take years or sometimes even decades to build. It is hard to raise the salience of these accomplishments to voters if there is nothing tangible to show yet. Many of the permitting and environmental reforms proposed by abundance agenda advocates may go a long way toward expediting these projects, but even if they pass, it is hard to envision transformative change occurring in the span of a presidency, let alone in a single House term. The long time horizon for these kinds of initiatives to produce tangible results is certainly a concern, as it may give pause to ambitious legislators who are thinking of spending their political capital to take up the abundance agenda mantle.
There is a final cautionary tale worth mentioning to a movement that is rapidly attracting philanthropic attention and capturing imaginations in fad-prone Silicon Valley. With the Effective Altruism movement of a few years ago, major benefactors engaged in an elite-driven (in addition to a mass movement) campaign to raise the salience of issues such as pandemic prevention, AI existential risk, and animal welfare. However, once FTX collapsed and Sam Bankman-Fried was arrested, the reputation of Effective Altruism also went down in the crash (though, as some believe, perhaps unfairly). Effective Altruism, as a brand, was no longer an effective vehicle for elite-driven persuasion (even if some of its policies continue to exist independently), as it is now associated with much of the same intense media and public scrutiny. Elite-driven campaigns need to fly under the radar. While scandals are typically unpredictable, movements can position themselves more securely by avoiding dominant figureheads who may stir controversy with the media and public.
But despite the potential pitfalls, the abundance agenda is worth it. It represents the most ambitious vision for a United States that is more prosperous, more dynamic, and more open. Skilled policy experts and savvy political operatives are required to execute on this vision, but the prize will be great.
Colin Mortimer is the Director of the Center for New Liberalism, a grassroots organization of center-left individuals across the world.
 | A guest post by
|