Home
About Linda
Brett Family
Foundation
Social Justice
Philanthropy
State of Change
SW Action
Bell Policy Center
Community
Involvement
Spruce Street
Mansion
National
Connections
Writings,
Speeches,
& Presentations
Contact Linda
|
|
|
The View from Colorado:
Challenges Facing Progressive
State Think Tanks
Memorandum
To: Mark Schmitt
Director of Policy & Research, U.S. Programs
Open Society Institute, New York, NY
From: Linda Shoemaker
President, Brett Family Foundation, Boulder, CO
Founding Board Chair, The Bell Policy Center, Denver, CO
Date: August 19, 2004
Increasingly, critical public policy battles in America are fought
at the state, rather than national, level and innovative new ideas
originate in small state-based policy centers. Colorado is a case
in point--a bellwether state in a conservative region of the country
that has spawned many of the ideas, personalities and organizations
at the forefront of the national right wing movement.
Belatedly, Colorado's progressive community has realized the
importance of building a similar state infrastructure to promote
progressive values and policy alternatives. To succeed, this fledgling
progressive movement needs long-term financial support from a
wider group of donors and more regional and national support networks.
This memo explores state, regional, and national strategies that
would be particularly effective in addressing the challenges progressive
policy centers face in Colorado. Based on speaking with various
experts around the county (see end notes), I believe that implementation
of these strategies would benefit progressive movements in many
states.
Colorado's National Role
Colorado has long been known as a bellwether state. Thirty years
ago, John Naisbitt, in his book Megatrends, identified it--along with
Florida, Connecticut, Washington, and California--as a key state where
ideas are tested and "if they float" are moved across the
nation.
In part because Colorado held that reputation, it became a magnet
for the far right. With a population of only 4.3 million people,
Colorado is now the location of the Independence Institute, Focus
on the Family and seven other think tanks who identify themselves
as "free market" on the State Policy Network (spn.org)
website. It has placed several far-right activists in Congress,
such as Marilyn Musgrave (author of the anti-gay marriage amendment
to the U.S. Constitution) and Tom Tancredo (the nation's most
vocal opponent of immigration).
Because of permissive citizen initiative laws, Colorado has also
been the testing ground for radical ballot initiatives, including
abortion bans, parental notifications laws, English-only requirements,
anti-gay rights efforts, and tax and spending limitations. While
voters have rejected many of these proposals, those that have
passed have been promoted as models for other states, including:
- The Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), the most restrictive
tax and spending limitation in the country, praised by Grover
Norquist as the "Holy Grail" of fiscal policy; and
- Amendment 2 (ultimately declared unconstitutional by the U.S.
Supreme Court), a bold attempt to use the state constitution to
override local ordinances protecting gay and lesbian citizens
from discrimination.
These and countless other successes in the Legislature and at
the local level have come as the result of several decades of methodical
work by right-wing activists and donors to build a durable organizational
infrastructure that conducts research, promotes policy changes, and
nurtures like-minded activists and candidates.
My foundation, the Brett Family Foundation, makes small grants
to numerous 501(c)(3) organizations in Colorado that together
form the state's core progressive infrastructure. This memo focuses
on our largest grantee, the Bell Policy Center. The Bell is a
multi-issue think tank with the capacity to fight radical ideas,
propose innovative policy alternatives, and present a cohesive
vision of opportunity based on progressive values. The National
Network of Grantmakers has recognized the Bell's potential as
a role model; I will be leading a workshop at their annual conference
in October titled "Funding Think Tanks."
The Bell Policy Center
Named for the Liberty Bell, the Bell Policy Center (thebell.org)
seeks to harness core American values to make Colorado a state
of opportunity for all, regardless of race or economic background.
It is a nonprofit 501(c)(3), which works closely with other public
policy and advocacy organizations in the state and a 501(c)(4),
the Bell Action Network.
The Bell believes that people can move from a cycle of dependency
to a cycle of opportunity by combining personal effort and community
support with public policies that open gateways to opportunity.
Those gateways are a (1) healthy birth, (2) safe and stimulating
early childhood, (3) elementary school literacy and learning,
(4) healthy teen lifestyle choices, (5) graduating from high school
with good skills, (6) access to college and adult education, (7)
healthy adulthood, (8) earning a decent living and building wealth,
and (9) a secure and dignified retirement.
This cycle of opportunity matrix provides a cohesive progressive
vision that integrates most of the issues of concern to working people
and their families. The Bell is not competitive with single-issue
advocates in Colorado; instead it helps connect them, support them
and promote their work within the framework of opening gateways to
opportunity. Because of this multi-issue framework, it is able to
move quickly from issue to issue as needs arise.
The Bell has been remarkably successful in a short period of
time. It has a staff of eight talented people, numerous fellows,
and a $1 million annual budget that is funded primarily by Colorado
individuals and private foundations. It has also received project-specific
funding from public foundations in Colorado as well as national
foundations, including Ford and Annie E. Casey.
The Bell has gained national attention because of its groundbreaking
work on the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), the nation's most
restrictive limitation on taxes and spending, which is now being
proposed in other states. The Bell published the first analysis
of how TABOR operates, finding major structural flaws. It toured
the state to publicize its findings, persuaded community leaders
that change was needed, facilitated meetings of experts to analyze
options, and proposed specific changes. Despite vigorous conservative
opposition, the Bell has formed a broad coalition supporting TABOR
reform that intends to work together until it achieves substantive
change.
1. Colorado Challenges and Strategies
Challenge: Stabilize Funding for The Bell So It Can Grow and Help
Other Groups
The Bell Policy Center, and Colorado's other core research and
advocacy organizations, need substantial, long-term commitments
for unrestricted, general operating support.
Donors within Colorado and the region can provide much of this
support. However, because Colorado is so pivotal nationally, progressive
national funders could benefit from spending more time and money
here. There is no doubt that right wing national funders contribute
significantly to like-minded organizations in Colorado and are
much more inclined to support multi-issue public policy operations
with long term general operating funds.
As new donors provide a larger proportion of the Bell's resources,
a second challenge has emerged. While the commitments of the original
donors continue to be for general operating support, many other
sources require that their investment be used for specific issues,
projects and activities. This limits the Bell's ability to focus
on its larger agenda, to respond quickly to new challenges, and
to remain relevant to the public policy debate.
An additional challenge is that, because of Colorado's pivotal national
role in the battle of ideas, experts from the Bell are being called
on by progressives in other states for advice on how best to fight
conservative policies that are similar to those piloted in our state.
Similarly, because the Bell has an effective model for a multi-issue
operation, groups of activists and donors from other states are seeking
help in starting similar organizations. The Bell is simply unable
- without new funding support - to meaningfully respond to these important
out-state requests.
Existing Strategies of The Bell Policy Center:
- Create a consortium of Colorado foundations and individuals
willing to make long-term commitments to general operating support
for the Bell Policy Center.
- Reach out in a coordinated fashion to national foundations
and individuals willing to make similar long-term commitments
to the Bell.
- Support similar strategies for Colorado's other core
policy and advocacy organizations.
2. Regional Challenges and Strategies:
Challenge: Provide Support for Progressive Groups in the Southwest
Progressive policy and advocacy organizations in Colorado and
neighboring states (especially Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma)
need access to technical support and training as well as the ability
to share ideas and work together through a new "Southwest
Action" organization.
State-level policy and advocacy organizations can be made stronger
and more effective through networks that allow them to learn from
one another and provide carefully targeted assistance programs.
There are numerous such umbrella regional organizations around
the country, but none in the Southwest. Two of The Bell's funders
(the Chambers Family Fund and the Brett Family Foundation) have
decided to explore starting such a regional support center.
This Funders Collaborative has begun research on what we are
provisionally calling Southwest Action. We have hired a researcher
to map progressive organizations and intend to hire Jeff Malachowsky
to do our feasibility study. Jeff was the founding executive director
of the Western States Center and is on the board of the State
Strategies Fund.
Existing Strategies of the Funders Collaborative:
- · Conduct research to better assess the state of the progressive
movement and key activist and policy groups in neighboring states.
- o Identify existing multi-issue state (or sub-state) think tanks
throughout the country.
- · Thoroughly evaluate the experiences of existing regional
organizations (such as the Western States Center and Northeast
Action) to identify key lessons.
- · Identify the right consultant to hire to develop a preliminary
work plan, budget and timeline for establishing Southwest Action.
- · Begin outreach to key progressive activists and donors
in the region and nationally.
3. National Challenges and Strategies
Challenge: Find Some New Way to Link State-level Policy Groups
There is no national group specifically designed to connect and
support state level (and sub-state level) organizations focused
on researching, formulating and advocating more progressive public
polices.
Various national organizations link together single-issue state
think tanks that focus on such issues as environmental protection,
women's rights and poverty. U.S. Action links state activist groups.
The SFAI network of State Fiscal Analysis Institutes admits one
fiscal policy operation per state and has 24 state operations
with five more in development. Most of these fiscal think tanks
are multi-issue and the SFAI operation provides good support.
However, because Colorado already has an SFAI affiliate, The Bell
is not eligible. There is also EARN, the Economic Analysis and
Research Network, linking research organizations focused on the
economic condition of low and middle income Americans and their
families. The Bell belongs to EARN and it provides some helpful
support functions. EARN has the potential to much more if it had
more resources.
In contrast, the right has a strong support system for state
"free market" think tanks, the State Policy Network
(spn.org), and a strong group linking conservative policy thinkers
to their policymakers, the American Legislative Exchange Council
(alec.org). Progressives tend to be more independent in their
thinking, but this isolation has led to a critical lack of support
systems. Based on my experience in Colorado, I agree with the
national experts who have said that more "connective tissue"
is needed.
Existing and Potential Strategies:
Progressive State Roundtable. A small group of influential leaders
has been meeting over the past year to explore how best to connect
and support progressive organizations at the state level. They
are proposing the formation of a new organization that is large
and diverse, connecting state, regional, and national organizations.
It will include key legislators, organizers, advocates, and activists
as well as both single-issue and multi-issue think tanks. I understand
that the three primary functions will be: 1) sharing and coordinating
information; 2) evaluating critical gaps and needs; and 3) providing
training, leadership development, and support. This is a very
exciting development that could be of great help to organizations
like The Bell Policy Center. (Note: As of the date of this memo,
the group does not have a written report detailing its proposal.
It should be available soon from Miles Rapoport or Tim McFeeley.)
Other Possible Strategies: If the organization envisioned by
the Progressive State Roundtable does not become a good support
system for nonprofits focused on state public policy, there are
other ways to create such a system. An existing network, such
as EARN, could be expanded. Or an existing organization, such
as the Center Policy Alternatives, could provide more outreach
to state think tanks. Another way to form this progressive policy
network would be by more formally connecting existing regional
networks such as the Western States Center and Northeast Action.
The most difficult strategy would be starting a new organization
specifically focused on state-level think tanks.
Challenge: Help Connect State Progressive Organizations with Individual
Donors
Individual donors are searching for ways to connect to each other
and to progressive non-profits in states other than their own
without duplicating the structure of the program officer system
used by large foundations. These donors generally need 1) absolute
assurance of privacy and 2) reasonable assurance that the potential
grantees are a good fit for them and a good bet for their investment.
To date, there are few strategies in place to facilitate this
connection.
Existing and Potential Strategies:
Alliance of Progressive Donors. Large individual donors have
formed a loose association known as the Phoenix Group or The Alliance
based on Rob Stein's power point detailing the "Conservative
Message Machine's Money Matrix." As described by Matt Bai
in the New York Times Magazine of July 25, 2004, these donors
want to use a venture-capital model to expose public policy entrepreneurs
to individual funders. Bai says that one of the founders, Simon
Rosenberg, "envisions a 'virtual marketplace,' patterned
very consciously after the kind of incubators venture capitalists
set up in the 90's, in which major investors could systematically
get to know like-minded bright, young innovators. Then the investors,
given a choice of ideas, could decide which projects they wanted
to get behind."
Women Donors Network. I belong to WDN (womendonors.org), an organization
of 100 progressive women donors who collectively donate some $250
million annually, much of it devoted to progressive social change.
The new Executive Director, Donna Hall, intends for the member-only
portion of the website to become a connecting point for WDN donors
and their grantees. The more it is informative and searchable,
the more valuable it will be. For example, as a Colorado donor,
I might be interested in funding access to higher education efforts
for minorities. This website could point me to organizations doing
this kind of work that are funded by other WDN members. By checking
with that member, I could be assured that my dollars would be
put to good work, then donate directly.
Expand Existing Operations. Since my personal passion is state-level
think tanks, I would like to see a network connecting individual
donors to these organizations. One existing model is the "State
Strategies Fund," a project of Proteus, which serves progressive
activist organizations. With more funding, Proteus could expand
this existing fund or establish a new "State Policy Fund."
The funds could have the dual purpose of re-granting public foundations
monies and helping individuals identify appropriate potential
grantees. This linkage between individual donors and policy shops
could also be an integral function of some other existing organization,
such as PolicyLink, or some new organization, such as that envisioned
by the Progressive State Roundtable.
Form Progressive Policy Network. Forming a new organization is obviously
the most difficult route. However, the initial steps are relatively
easy--identify all state-level progressive policy groups and then
create a searchable website that provides basic information about
each group and its policy priorities. The difficult challenge would
be in marketing the website and attracting individual donors to it.
Start State of Change. State of Change is a proposed new non-profit whose goal
is to connect progressive nonprofits to donors seeking social change.
It will primarily operated through an innovative website where potential
donors can be matched to organizations based on the states and the issue
areas that are of interest to them.
Conclusion
The View From Colorado is encouraging. Progressive activists
and donors have a significant opportunity to solidify and expand
the progressive policy infrastructure in Colorado and the Southwest,
a region still dominated by the conservative right. By pooling
resources to support the Bell Policy Center and other key organizations,
funders can ensure that there is an effective progressive voice
to reinvigorate the debate and offer viable policy alternatives.
By working together to support similar organizations in neighboring
states and create a regional network, the effect will be amplified.
If we are successful, the result will be that this critical part
of the country will have the infrastructure needed to sustain
a long-term progressive future.
Thanks to Wade Buchanan, President of The Bell Policy Center,
who co-authored some sections of this memo and to my partner in
progressive policy philanthropy, Merle Chambers.
Thanks also to the many people who took the time to speak with
me as I explored the topics covered in this memorandum. In particular:
Michael Ettlinger, Economic Policy Institute (mettlinger@epinet.org)
Tracy Gary, Changemakers (TracyGary1@aol.com)
Donna Hall, Women's Donor Network (dhall@womendonors.org)
Jean Hardisty, Political Research Associates (jvhardity@aol.com)
Nick Johnson, Center on Budget & Policy Priorities (Johnson@cbpp.org)
David Dyssegaard Kallick, Fiscal Policy Institute (ddkallick@fiscalpolicy.org)
Jesse King, foundation consultant (jesse.king@att.net)
Sally Kohn, Ford Foundation (s.kohn@fordfound.org)
George Lakoff, Rockridge Institute (lakoff@rockridgeinstitute.org)
Jeff Malachowsky, State Strategies Fund, (jmal@compuserve.com)
Tim McFeeley, the Center for Policy Alternatives (tmcfeeley@cfpa.org)
Karen Paget, author/consultant (kmpaget@aol.com)
John Podesta, Center for American Progress (jpodesta@americanprogress.org)
Miles Rapoport, Demos (mrapoport@demos-usa.org)
Jen Ray, the Center for Policy Alternatives (jray@cfpa.org)
Frank Sanchez, Needmore Fund (sanch@trailnet.com)
Bill Vandenberg, Colorado Progressive Coalition (coprogressive@aol.com)
|
|
