Last week, reporters for The Guardian pulled the cur­tain back on a net­work of well-fund­ed, well-orga­nized right-wing think tanks and their extreme agenda.

Doc­u­ments obtained by The Guardian show the bland­ly-named State Pol­i­cy Net­work is work­ing to under­mine edu­ca­tion, health­care, and rev­enue col­lec­tion in near­ly every state in the coun­try. Their spe­cif­ic pro­pos­als are extreme­ly rad­i­cal, from pri­va­tiz­ing schools to gut­ting pub­lic healthcare.

The Guardian’s report also shows how this network’s Wash­ing­ton affil­i­ates plan to launch the next phase of their attack on our eco­nom­ic secu­ri­ty and our democracy.

The State Pol­i­cy Net­work is a cre­ation of the noto­ri­ous Amer­i­can Leg­isla­tive Exchange Coun­cil (ALEC), and is fund­ed by right-wing donors includ­ing the Koch Broth­ers to impose extrem­ist poli­cies at the state lev­el, bypass­ing a fed­er­al gov­ern­ment where Democ­rats remain pow­er­ful enough to block this rad­i­cal agenda.

Here in Wash­ing­ton, the State Pol­i­cy Net­work has two affil­i­ates: the Free­dom Foun­da­tion and the Wash­ing­ton Pol­i­cy Center.

Both of these groups are well known for their right-wing pol­i­cy agen­da and their desire to dis­man­tle and destroy Washington’s pro­gres­sive achievements.

The Guardian’s report­ing details two new lines of attack we can expect from these think tanks, based on grant requests they sub­mit­ted to the State Pol­i­cy Net­work. The Free­dom Foun­da­tion wants to launch a new cam­paign claim­ing that cities and coun­ties are some­how “bor­row­ing beyond their means” — try­ing to bring the log­ic of aus­ter­i­ty to local gov­ern­ment, demand­ing we cut back on spend­ing to address some sup­posed bor­row­ing prob­lem that does not actu­al­ly exist.

The Wash­ing­ton Pol­i­cy Cen­ter is plan­ning a cam­paign to take Tim Eyman’s uncon­sti­tu­tion­al 23 rule for tax increas­es to the local lev­el, hop­ing to get more local gov­ern­ments to enact a super­ma­jor­i­ty require­ment to raise revenue.

We don’t know whether the State Pol­i­cy Net­work agreed to fund these cam­paigns, but they have fund­ed oth­er cam­paigns for these think tanks in the past.

Thanks to The Guardian, we know what they’re up to, and have an oppor­tu­ni­ty to antic­i­pate these attacks and stop them before they succeed.

The Free­dom Foundation’s attempt to smear the fis­cal health of local gov­ern­ments is eas­i­ly debunked. Local gov­ern­ments in Wash­ing­ton State have been bor­row­ing mon­ey appro­pri­ate­ly and their cred­it rat­ings remain strong.

Seat­tle and King Coun­ty, for exam­ple, both have AAA ratings.

The Free­dom Foun­da­tion seeks to destroy local pub­lic ser­vices through cuts to vital pub­lic ser­vices, but knows that Wash­ing­to­ni­ans like these ser­vices and do not want to see them under­mined. In order to over­come that resis­tance, the Free­dom Foun­da­tion knows they must por­tray cities and coun­ties as in bad finan­cial shape, which is why they want mon­ey to launch a cam­paign to con­coct an entire­ly fic­tion­al sto­ry of local gov­ern­ments bor­row­ing beyond their means.

Ear­li­er this year the Supreme Court declared the two-thirds super­ma­jor­i­ty require­ment at the heart of Tim Eyman’s I‑601 clones to be uncon­sti­tu­tion­al. But it looks like the Wash­ing­ton Pol­i­cy Cen­ter is undaunt­ed by the LEV deci­sion, as they are now seek­ing to impose the same unde­mo­c­ra­t­ic scheme on cities and counties.

We don’t have to look far to see how cre­at­ing an unde­mo­c­ra­t­ic thresh­old for rais­ing rev­enue can cause big problems.

Many cities in Cal­i­for­nia are in dire straits because nei­ther local elect­ed offi­cials nor vot­ers can raise rev­enue with­out a two-thirds vote. Get­ting to 66.67% in any elec­tion is a tough hur­dle, and in any oth­er sit­u­a­tion, any­thing that gets more than 60% of vot­er sup­port is con­sid­ered to have won in a landslide.

Yet just last year, a pro­pos­al to fund a major expan­sion of mass tran­sit in Los Ange­les “failed” because it got 66.11% of the vote, just short of the two-thirds thresh­old. If levies or rev­enue pro­pos­als in Wash­ing­ton required a two-thirds vote, deci­sions about fund­ing vital pub­lic schools like schools or police, fire, and emer­gency med­ical response would end up in the hands of the few, not the many.

These pro­posed cam­paigns also show how Washington’s right-wing think tanks exist to advance the agen­da of wealthy nation­al donors, rather than the inter­ests of the peo­ple of the Ever­green State. These think tanks have had a lot of suc­cess shap­ing the agen­da in oth­er states, and in places like Wis­con­sin and Michi­gan are key to the Tea Party’s war on eco­nom­ic secu­ri­ty. They haven’t had as much suc­cess in the Pacif­ic North­west… yet. But they are com­ing for us.

We need to be ready to stop them.

Adjacent posts

8 replies on “Right-wing think tanks plotting Eymanesque campaign against our cities and counties”

  1. Robert Cruick­shank’s report needs to be read by our pro­gres­sive may­ors and city and coun­ty coun­cil elect­ed offi­cials around the state. WPC and the “Free­dom” Foun­da­tion are not about good pol­i­cy or free­dom for Wash­ing­to­ni­ans. Their stealth strate­gies under­mine local con­trol and local deci­sion-mak­ing — the kind of grass-roots gov­ern­ing we like out here in the Pacif­ic NW. Our non-par­ti­san local pol­i­tics are per­fect tar­gets for infil­tra­tion from the likes of the Koch Broth­ers. Our local elect­ed offi­cials tend to want to gov­ern and will look for com­pro­mise solu­tions. But this is a con­cert­ed effort to under­mine our con­fi­dence in our local elect­ed offi­cials — and we must do more than pro­tect. We have to advance with our own ideas and agen­da to make progress. Win­ning is the very best response.

  2. I’m work­ing on this study, and I helped draft the request to bet­ter under­stand munic­i­pal debt. If any­one out there wants to send me infor­ma­tion, please feel free to do so. It should­n’t be a secret. We’ve been work­ing on these issues for 20 years. Your help to make this study as com­plete as pos­si­ble is great­ly appreciated.

  3. Democ­ra­cy sucks when peo­ple vote for things that you don’t like.

    And get your facts straight — the 23 require­ment was found uncon­sti­tu­tion­al for state gov­ern­ment, but that does­n’t mean it’s uncon­sti­tu­tion­al for local gov­ern­ments. Let the vot­ers decide. That’s what democ­ra­cy looks like.

  4. The two thirds vote cam­paign is already under­way in this state. Pierce Coun­ty vot­ers passed it, it’s in place in Spokane and vot­ers in Yaki­ma passed it on this year’s Novem­ber bal­lot. It is hap­pen­ing under the radar of pro­gres­sives for the most part, as there has been lit­tle cam­paign­ing against it. Time to wake up for sure. Thanks for help­ing to pub­li­cize what’s happening.

  5. Last time I looked, this coun­try was NOT a democ­ra­cy, but a rep­re­sen­ta­tive repub­lic. Learn the dif­fer­ence before you rail against the sys­tem. Col­lec­tive think­ing, also known as mob rule, is what got us $17 tril­lion in debt…a debt that no amount of ‘bor­row­ing’ can ever repay. Yes, it is time to wake up, but to the fact that pro­gres­sive ideas are bank­rupt­ing cities and states.

    1. Ah, Steve. Every once in a while some­one like you comes along and makes the hilar­i­ous claim that Amer­i­ca is not a democ­ra­cy. Actu­al­ly, Amer­i­ca is a democ­ra­cy, because a repub­lic is a democ­ra­cy. We’ve cov­ered this before over at Per­ma­nent Defense.

      If you look at actu­al data, Steve, you’ll see that deficits bal­loon while Repub­li­can pres­i­dents are in charge and shrink when Demo­c­ra­t­ic pres­i­dents (who are much more pro­gres­sive than Repub­li­cans) are in charge. It turns out that tax cuts for the wealthy, gen­er­ous sub­si­dies for big cor­po­ra­tions, and trick­le-down eco­nom­ics don’t work! It’s time for a return to pro­gres­sive eco­nom­ics and fis­cal respon­si­bil­i­ty at all lev­els of gov­ern­ment. We at NPI will do all we can to pre­vent com­mu­ni­ties from los­ing the abil­i­ty to demo­c­ra­t­i­cal­ly enact respon­si­ble bud­gets that fund our vital pub­lic services.

Comments are closed.