A better way to spend $100 million, instead of on a Presidential campaign, Mr. Steyer

[Ohiogal]

from David Leonhardt of the NYT. This is from a newsletter that I get in my email.


I admire Tom Steyer’s climate activism. He’s passionate about what I think is the single biggest threat to human well-being, and he has won some important victories. His efforts to reduce pollution in Nevada and Michigan — through ballot initiatives last year — offer a model for winning future climate battles, as I argued in this recent Times Magazine piece.

But I am skeptical that his presidential campaign, which he announced yesterday, will do much to further his goals, either on climate or on other progressive causes.

The Democrats do not lack presidential candidates. Steyer, as a billionaire hedge fund manager without any special appeal either to swing voters or occasional voters, doesn’t seem to stand out from the crowd. And he is vowing to spend $100 million on his campaign.

How might he use that money to do more good?

Spend it on a nationwide voter registration drive, as my colleague Jamelle Bouie said on Twitter. “Hiring and training thousands of people to identify and register nonvoters and bring them to the polls is probably the single most effective thing you could do ahead of 2020,” Bouie says. Similarly, Daniel Nichanian of The Justice Collaborative suggests spending money to back ballot initiatives to create automatic voter registration and improve voting rights.

Steyer could help Democrats retake control of the Senate, which they’ll need to do in order to pass any of their priorities. So far, most campaign donations and attention are flowing to the presidential campaign. But there are 10 competitive Senate races in 2020, and Democrats need to win six of them (and the White House) to take control, as Nathan Gonzales of Roll Call explains.

Steyer could focus on state legislature elections, which receive less attention than Senate races. These state elections will shape politics for years to come, because they will help determine who draws political boundaries after the 2020 census, as The New Republic’s Matt Ford notes.

Finally, Steyer could spend more money to fight climate change. He could support an initiative like the Global Resilience Partnership, which tries to help protect vulnerable countries from storms and extreme weather. Or he could support more ballot initiatives that would reduce pollution or increase funding for scientific research.

As Vox’s Kelsey Piper wrote: “Hey, billionaires: Running for president is actually a bad idea. You’re very unlikely to win, it’s not clear that you have the skills to do the job well, and there are much, much better ways to make a difference in the world.”

[customerserviceguy]

1. The mainstream media loves it

Plenty of bucks to be spent on advertising, while they cook the polls to make it look like a horse race.