Hungering for Democracy: A Conversation with Frances Moore Lappé [12-5-19]

Foreign. Welcome to the next episode of Another Way, the podcast produced by Equal Citizens, the nonpartisan pro democracy organization founded by Lawrence Lessig. This is Adam Iken, the campaigns manager for Equal Citizens. Before we begin, I wanted to remind you once again that we have a Patreon to support this podcast. If you become a Patreon supporter, not only will you allow us to keep this podcast going, but you'll get access to bonus episodes and other cool rewards. To sign up, go to patreon.com that's P A T R E O-N.com/equalities. Now to the topic of this episode. Joining me today in the studio for a change is Frances Moore Lepay. Frankie, as her friends call her, is the author or co Author of 19 books about world hunger, democracy, and the environment. Her first and most well known was Diet for a Small planet, published in 1971. This book sold over 3 million copies and arguably shaped a generation of food and environmental activists. In 2008, Women's National Book association selected it as one of 75 Books by Women whose words have changed the world. The Smithsonian's National Museum of American history in Washington, D.C. described it as one of the most influential political tracks of the times. Frankie was named by Gourmet Magazine as one of 25 people alongside some notable names such as Thomas Jefferson, Upton Sinclair, and Julia Child, whose work has shaped the way America eats. She has also received the Right Livelihood Award, considered an alternative Nobel, for revealing the political and economic causes of world hunger and how citizens can help remedy them. Currently, Frankie is the principal of the Small Planet Institute, the office at which I currently work. We rent a desk there and in full disclosure, Frankie and I are very good friends. We also co authored a book together about democracy in 2017 called daring democracy. Frankie, welcome to the podcast.

Thank you, Adam. I'm so happy to be with you.

It's really great to actually have you in the studio. I think this is the first interview that I've done in a while where I can actually see my guest. It really does make a difference and obviously we are friends. So, Frankie, let's start back in 1971 with Diet for a Small Planet, a book most people don't think about that's about democracy. But you and I have talked about this a lot. The message of Diet for a Small Planet was very much one of democracy. Can you explain the basic premise of Diet for a Small Planet and how it pertains to democracy?

Yes, I'll try. My big aha moment. In some ways, the beginning of what I think of as my adulthood. I was 26 at the time that I had this real estate in the UC Berkeley library. I had the really strong hunch that if I could just answer the question, why is there hunger in the world? That that would unlock the mysteries of economics and politics. Because every other species has figured out how to feed itself and its offspring. So I wanted to understand, and we were being told that the answer was simple. There's just not enough food. I wanted to know if that was true. Well, very soon in my process, I learned that indeed there was more than enough to make us all thrive and that hunger was a human construct. And so very soon I started saying, hunger is not caused by scarcity of food, but by a scarcity of democracy, which meant for me that the only reason that anyone would go hungry, of course, is because they lack power. And so there was a direct connection. I mean, I said, to the extent that hunger exists, by definition, democracy does not. And so that was the key insight. It was really totally about human power that was at the root and not lack of proper calories.

Right. And so, you know, since then, since 1971, you've authored many books and a number of which were about democracy. But I'm curious. I mean, I think for our listeners, you're a giant in the food world. In the world of food studies, you are one of the quintessential names people cite. Why did you move from that to a more explicit focus on democracy? Because you and I have talked about this. You made a pledge to focus on democracy, reform the nuts and bolts of democracy. Why? Why did you make that massive leap from the world you were comfortable in to a new field?

Well, it wasn't a world I was comfortable in if I knew that at heart it was fundamentally about democracy. So I would always, you know, even in the very early speeches, I would take it to that point. But, you know, I could almost see my audiences thinking this. Oh, that sounds like a cool sound bite, lady, but what do you do with that? If the problem is democracy, what should I do? And I felt I never really had enough answers. And I kept kind of pushing myself and then did in the early 90s, found co. Found the center for Living Democracy. So I made that step then. It was very much more, because I didn't know at that point how soon our electoral political system would be so profoundly corrupted and broken. So I focused more on the participatory aspects of democracy. The small D democracy, I think of it. But then in more recent times, I've just Felt okay, you can't mess around, kid. I've said to myself, you've got to just go for it. And it's a lot harder. It's harder to really focus one's energy and know how to engage in the democracy movement, as I now know that you and I both see it. By the way, that's capital D, capital M. It's real. So it took me a while, you know, to really, to really make that shift, to really, really commit to focus on democracy.

Right. And so, of course, you know, my question begged a little bit. I wanted you to talk a little, you know, to mention the fact that, you know, most people don't realize or remember that in the 90s you did focus on democracy, but again, from a. From a different lens than where you are now, which is much more about the kind of electoral management structure of voting rights, campaign finance and gerrymandering. But when you made that pledge, I mean, it was, it was 2015 when you really decided to yourself that you, you were going to jump into this world of democracy reform. And if I remember correctly, you made a public pledge. Can you talk about that and the meaning of that?

Well, I had just completed what I knew to be my final book on world hunger, world hunger, 10 myths. And that's when I said, okay, you've done it, you've updated that, you've rewritten it in key ways, and now you've got to go for it. So I wrote an open letter to the food movement that this is why I'm doing what I'm doing, and sent it to all the members on our list in Small Planet Institute. And I created an open letter more broadly, too, about what it would look like to build a democracy movement. And so I really do believe that public pledging is foundational because we're all social creatures and sometimes it's very hard to make a big turn in one's life. And I felt like if I just spoke it out there and I would be more able to hold myself accountable.

Right. And especially when, you know, you're transitioning into a new field after building your career as a public scholar in a different field, I think that there, there's certainly some tendency or potential to have a situation where you are tempted to return back to what's comfortable.

Right.

And so the kind of pledging makes it a little more real.

True. I want to add, though, that There is the 50th anniversary edition of Diet for a Small Planet to come out in 2021, and I will spend that, create a new introductory chapter to create even a clear link. And, you know, this inseparable. We cannot solve the food issues without democracy. And so I want to take advantage of that.

Right. And especially speaking to an audience that may not have been, you know, spent much time thinking about democracy. Right. I mean, it's really an intersection which we'll talk about later in this podcast. So let's broaden the conversation a bit to you. What is democracy? You've spent, as we have said, 50 years grappling with this question. So if you could, you know, condense your answer into a couple sentences.

Well, I'll start with two words, human dignity. And I've come to think of human dignity as our essential needs beyond the physical. Of course, we need democracy to meet our physical needs, but beyond that, our need for a sense of agency that we count, that we have a voice, that that's not just a few of us, that's all of us. Our need for real meaning and purpose, that's beyond just our own survival or even beyond just our family survival, although, of course, we have to prioritize that. And third, I think we have a need for feeling connected to others in this common purpose, again, beyond, of course, our immediate friends. And so those three needs being met, voice, connection and purpose, they add up to human dignity, and they are an expression and they are created by true democracy. And so that is how I think of it. It is much, much more than voting, although, of course, our electoral, a fair electoral system is part of the answer. But it has to do with norms and practices that we can teach our children that they can be part of the solution at every st their lives, whether it's speaking out in their classrooms against bullying or whatever. That to me is democracy. Right. It's speaking up for our values and knowing that we count.

Right. And there's also, you know, the additional themes that, you know, you and I have spoken about of, you know, transparency in processes and mutual accountability that we together are coming.

Yes, thank you.

You know, we are coming together to decide our collective future. And there's certain power in that.

Right. Those are the, I think of then, descriptors or three elements of conditions without which these needs can't be met. So if human dignity is the essence of what democracy is about, how is it achieved? It achieves, as you say. I talk a lot about the inclusive power, the widest dispersion of power and transparency being key. I often talk to people about, wait, we don't do very well when things are secretive, as, say, in the financial system. Before the big meltdown, it turns out that the folks who were selling these risky derivatives knew exactly what they were doing, but they knew that they were doing it in secret. So we don't do well with secrecy. So transparency, number two. And number three, this sense moving away from a blaming culture and accepting mutual accountability. I love to quote Rabbi Heschel, Abraham Joshua Heschel, who said, yes, some are guilty, but we are all responsible. And that is the spirit of democracy, that blaming doesn't get us very far. Yes, people should be held accountable, but that includes us, too. I also love to say, yeah, we can point fingers. As long as that finger comes all full circle back to ourselves, what are we going to do to make the difference?

And there's a certain level of power that comes with that recognition, right?

Absolutely.

To know that we are all responsible means that we all have a role to play in the solution.

Exactly. That is the beautiful flip side and the joyous part and what you and I call in our book the Thrill of Democracy and really confronting this notion that democracy is simply a dull duty that's added onto our humanity. And I say, no, no, no. It is the essence of our humanity.

Right. So, okay, let's go to the flip side, though, which is, you know, you've spent the last 50 years, starting with Diet for a Small Planet, but in many, many books since, you know, really articulating about the power of ideas, that the way that we see the world in many respects determines the possibilities open to us. Can you explain a little bit about what that means? And then what are the thought barriers that exist that prevent us from achieving a real democracy that meets all of the different categories you just outlined?

Yes. This has been so central to everything that I've been learning. The degree to which, you know, we hear the expression seeing is believing, but actually, for human beings, believing is seeing. I often quote Albert Einstein, who said, it is theory which decides what we can observe and what doesn't fit into our theory of reality. We literally cannot see. And there's a lot of evidence for that. There's this famous experiment with some kids playing ball and somebody in a monkey suit is in the midst, but they're so focused on the balls that they don't even see it because it is outside of their imagination that that would appear. So there's a lot of funny and not so funny ways to describe the problem or the challenge of human beings. And so if we think, I mean, just the most simple sense, if we think of democracy as something apart from us, unto us or for us, we won't ever see the voice that we have, the energizing and fulfilling aspects of what it means to create democracy together. And this sense of, oh, the government is the enemy, the government is a problem, rather than the government is us. It's an expression of the choices that we are making. There's so many ways in which the frame that either detracts or enables us to be part of the solution. And so a lot of what I try to do in my life is to check out, you know, try to be cognizant of what are the frames that keep me from seeing possibility, right?

And one of the key ones has been this real sustained campaign over the last 30, 40, 50 years to really denigrate government itself. That there's, you know, that they want, you know, folks say that they want to shrink government to the size where they can flush it down the bathtub, right? That this idea that somehow government itself is a problem and that we should, you know, pay public employees nothing or, you know, public officials nothing, and decrease regulatory power and all that stuff, but that itself is in many respects a thought barrier to democracy. Seeing government as the problem because government is just what we collectively decide to do together.

Right, exactly. So that perhaps is the deepest that I have seen change in my lifetime that this notion, if you so well put it, that that government is the problem rather than what it is, it is an expression of who we are, what we choose to do together. And it was a very deliberate change, as we document in our book Daring Democracy, that there was a very deliberate attempt put forth by some of the wealthiest and corporate interest in this country to shift the notion of government and to deny the value. There's a beautiful book called American Amnesia, which I'm forgetting the author's names at

the Hacker and Pearson.

Yes, thank you, Adam. But it goes through all the things that medical inventions and technological breakthroughs and just so many aspects of our lives that have been because of government research and investment and, and Americans have no sense of that because partly again, this frame that we can't see what's outside of our filter. And so I think this living democracy is the term that I use to really try to communicate that we are all co creating and part of that is co creating what government does as our, as an expression of our values. And that's what we have to reclaim here.

Right. And you know, building off of that, another part of this anti government ideology has been kind of that human beings are capable of nothing but self interest. And if humans can Only are only capable of self interest. There's no real capacity to come together and create a common good. And democracy is nothing but a common good. Right. I mean, it's the quintessential expression of that common or public good.

Yes. And I want to underscore there that in the preamble to the Constitution, a very premise of our nation is to promote the general welfare, which is another way to talk about the public good. And so, yes, absolutely, we have been told that we are simply isolated, sort of atomistic little self seekers, I think, of selfish little shoppers is the way that we're sort of reduced by this premise of our nature. And so I love to point out constantly to myself and to others that actually we are, by anthropologists standards, we're the most cooperative species. And this particular human trait is intentional cooperation. That we have this capacity to set goals and carry them out together. That this is so distinct of our species and that there's proof as you look at the way that our brains work, you know, they've had MRI scans of our brains while we're both, you know, sometimes cooperating and other times competing. And they find that when humans cooperate, actually the pleasure centers in their brains light up as if we're doing very pleasurable things like eat chocolate. So we evolved to really enjoy cooperating. And I think this is. This is so different from the common inherited frame of our society, but it's definitely essential to understanding and appreciating, enjoy the potential of democracy to work. And when we think about it, you know, we are really, of course aware that it's painful to watch other people suffer and that we enjoy seeing our broader community thriving. And yet because of the Othering, because of the blaming that goes on, were prevented from fully embracing that capacity.

Right. And I think so to kind of summarize here, I think your view is that democracy, far from something that we're trying to fit into human nature, it's actually a quintessential part of human nature. It fits perfectly with human nature that democracy is part of human essence as it has evolved over the time.

And I would add there that I'm not just to make sure that you understand, I'm not arguing that we are by nature simply cooperative. Obviously not. What my theme song of my life has become is that we now know, certainly after the Holocaust and many other, that human beings can. Ordinary, regular people, not freaks or monsters, but regular people can behave in brutal, brutal, cruel ways. And we can also, you know, give our lives for others and step up every day. To be cooperative and helpful. And so much depends therefore on the rules, the norms that we create together. So it's really the art of democracy begins when we appreciate that we can be either right. And therefore I don't want to be tested. That's the way I put it often is that I want to be in a democracy because I don't want to be tested. What would I have done in Nazi Germany as a non Jew? What would I have done? Would I have acted? Would I have risked? I don't know. And I don't want to be tested. I want to live in a society where nobody has to be tested in that way.

And that's why the institutions are so important. The preserving and creating ever more perfect institutions is one of the highest tasks of humans. Because I think the rules of the game determine the behavior and that if they're designed properly, they fit perfectly with human nature. Poorly, they can lead to some atrocious things.

Yeah, just bring out the best in us and keep the worst in check. And we know that this dispersion of power, transparency and mutual accountability throughout our long history, we know that those fundamental premises that they bring out the best in humanity.

Right. And you're not saying that you have the, you know, the blueprint for how to meet all three of those things, but I think that the real takeaway here is that those are three guiding principles that we should be striving for in our democratic and electoral institutions.

Absolutely.

So, you know, I mean you talked a bit about this that you know, another encouraging thing is that these, these thoughts that democracy is incompatible with human nature, that you know, government is bad instead of what we decide to do together has really just been, you know, half century campaign by, you know, think tanks funded by, you know, the wealthiest among us. And it's not an idea that has always been with us. I mean, I guess going back to Thomas Hobbes have had this idea that, you know, humans are only capable of, you know, acting in self interest. But, but that said, I mean it is a relatively new phenomenon. And you know, you and I have talked about this. We were 49 years apart in age. And what that does is I think it provides a really good opportunity for, you know, a lot of teaching to be done in terms of like when you were growing up, that this anti government ideology, this anti democratic ideology wasn't as pervasive as it is now. And that's an encouraging thing.

Very encouraging. I mean when I was in college, just think Peace Corps was being born and then I got out of college. And my first job was with the Great Society program. It was a beautiful example of the war on poverty, was, in a sense, my employer. I was paid by the city of Philadelphia ultimately to go door to door to help people on welfare, to stand up for their rights, and to hopefully become homeowners and really take charge. And it was a glorious time where we were working together across race lines, in my case. And it was a time when I really believed in government as a force for good and that my voice was heard. And so that was a great time to be young and to feel that energy.

I mean, it's just, it's, you know, from my perspective. Right. I mean, I don't think I've ever had a situation in my life where I felt my voice was heard by the governments. And I think that speaks to the profound democratic crises that we face, is that, you know, it's, it's. It's, you know, the alienation people currently feel in our. In our democracies is profound.

And I want to add that during that period, we actually significantly reduced the poverty rate. We cut it very, very much. So it wasn't just that it felt good to be doing these things. We were. It was a time where we were making real differences for the good in people's lives. Lives.

Right. So. So going back into history is one good way to realize that there are ways to break out of these thought traps that prevent us from achieving democracy. But another way is by looking abroad. And I know you've. You spent a lot of time thinking about this, that, you know, other countries, I mean, there's. There is. There are problems in many democracies across the world, but in. In general, many other democracies don't face the kind of structural rigging of the rules that we currently face in the United States. And actually we met for the first time at the first international conference on money and politics in Mexico City in 2015. So I'm wondering, you know, does that experience of looking at other countries and seeing the ways in which they do such a better job when it comes to creating democratic institutions, does that encourage you?

Does it still encourage you? It does, very much. And I wonder why Americans are so unaware, because to me, it's not a matter of denigrating my America, but to saying, oh, wow, you know, that this shows that we can do better and we'd better be doing better. That on voting rights, I mean, really, the European countries. I was just looking at the numbers that our last presidential election was something like 56% of eligible voters. And in Europe, it ranges from 70 to well into the 80% eligible voter participation. That's huge. And the consequences, I mean, it's heartbreaking. When I look at France, for example, in health care, that their infant mortality rate, ours is 80% higher. I mean, that's. People's lives are broken by a broken democracy. So it's not just voter turnout in what I was pointing to, but it's real consequences in people's lives. And I remember a few years ago, I looked at where we stood in terms of electoral integrity, and on gerrymandering, there was only one country. If it hadn't been for Madagascar, we would have been at the bottom of the list of most gerrymandered districts in terms of electoral systems. And so I think rather than being discouraged, for me, the way I try to work with it is that it's motivating that we know we can do better and that it has real consequences in people's lives. Right.

And it proves that, you know, that it's not the fallacy of human nature that prevents us. It's just about our political will to change it. And that's, again, none of this is to say that European countries are examples of perfect democracy. If there's anything that's clear from the news today, European countries or countries across the world are having tremendous problems maintaining the legitimacy of their democracy. But the point is, is that they do still prove that we can do better. And, you know, one of the things that I really appreciate, appreciate about our partnership is we both recently came into this democracy reform world. It's been about five years. And, you know, what do you see? You're looking at this space with relatively fresh eyes. What do you make of the progress or the lack of progress that we've made? What are you feeling right now in terms of this fight for democracy returning back to the United States?

Well, what encourages me most is what we've described as this movement of movements. What encourages me most is, is people across all passion issues. I think of the environment or racial justice, really important issues. More and more people are getting it. Hey, yes, I can continue working for a specific reform, but if I'm not also shoulder to shoulder with people going to the root, the root system reforms that have to do with voting rights and removing money from its grip on our system and equal voice through end of gerrymandering, that I've got to add that in. And I know Josh Silver at Represent Us gave us both a term of, hey, you can love two children at once. That he said to me once, and what he meant by that is, yes, I can still have a particular passion around my interest in food justice and healthy food for all. And I can be a stalwart for democracy that it's not an either or so that has so grown. In fact. In fact, just last week or so, I was at the Democracy Initiative's annual meeting. And Democracy initiative now represents 45 or more million people through the membership of their initiative and now has, oh, I

think it's like over 60 or maybe 70 organizations.

Between 60 and 70 organizations. And so at this annual meeting here, I am sitting with people from the Postal Workers Union, and I'm listening to a young man from Texas who had just gone through this very risky direct action to block fossil fuel exports as an activist for Greenpeace. So there was Greenpeace and there was the Postal Union, and of course, Common Cause is part of the leadership. And these groups that are both the direct democracy, directly working on democracy, and those who understand the environmental movement, the unions, that they have to spend part of their time working on system reform. Very encouraging.

Right. And so, you know, I mean, do you. Do you sense that even within the four or five years you've been in this work that more and more of these organizations are recognizing it?

Oh, absolutely. I don't think that existed at all. I mean, I wasn't aware of it five years ago. So that is the thing that is so thrilling to me, because it's essential.

Right. And do you think that, like, I mean, just from the perspective of, you know, folks like, you know, Food first, for example, which is an organization you founded in the 70s that deals with the issues of food insecurity. I mean, do you think that that enriches the conversation for an organization like Food first to be focusing on democracy? Or. I mean, I use Food First. Here is just one example. But. But any of the food organizations, the hunger organizations, the environmental organizations, do you think that gives them both. Increases the odds of success, but also makes their message or their. How can I put this? Their theory of change even more realistic by integrating democracy reform into their broader agenda?

I believe so. I mean, I know Mike Brune at Sierra Club, Eric Pica, Friends of the Earth, these are two major organizations that have both, you know, stepped out on this. And it was a little risky, no doubt, at first. Would our members really come with us in this? And they have, because they get it. You know, this is a system problem. It's not.

And everyone feels alienated. I mean, it's not as if you know, just because you care about the environment doesn't mean you don't also don't recognize the system is broken.

Right, exactly.

That you can hold both of those things together and actually integrate those. Those, you know, different thoughts, is that we need to fix the environment, we need to prevent catastrophic climate change, but also that that's probably not likely if. If you also recognize the fossil fuel industry has a stranglehold over our politics on the state and federal level.

Exactly. And that's what I'm working on right now in.

Right. We'll talk about your upcoming book because I think this really exemplifies it. But. So, okay, I want to dig in a bit deeper here. So you say you're optimistic. You point to democracy initiative.

I'm not an optimist.

Fair enough. Fair enough. Okay, you can explain.

Well, I don't think optimism is required, and I think it's very difficult to come by right now. But my theory of human beings, at least this one now speaking, is that I don't need to have some kind of confidence in a good outcome, which I define as optimism. All I think I need, and what I do have, is a sense that there is a possibility that my work could make. Make some tiny difference in not only democracy arising in the US but now our planet surviving this credible emergency of climate. That it can make some difference. I think all I need and all I feel I, you know, all I need is a sense of possibility. So I call myself a possibilist.

Yeah. And I'm sure after this podcast, you're gonna. You're gonna criticize me for having forgotten that because I. Above my desk, I think I have the it's not possible to know what's possible poster.

That's right.

So I think. So let me rephrase that. You sense possibility. So part of the possibility we've talked about this is that, you know, you're. It's not a kind of pie in the sky possibility. It's a possibility drawn from concrete success stories. So let's talk about the success stories. What are some of the things that you've observed from the stories that you've heard from people on the ground, from what you've read about, what are some of the concrete success stories in the fight for democracy that keeps you going?

So many. But I want to go to something I've just learned about in the last month that is just beautiful. Maine. The state of Maine in the year 2000 was its first clean elections, and that meant that you could run for office if you could show that you were a viable candidate by getting at that point, it was $5 from 50 people to say, yes, yes, yes, I want that candidate.

So this was the public financing.

Public financing in Maine was. The first time, was 2000. And at that time, soon after that, I met a hero of mine, Deb Simpson, who was a waitress, and her friend saw leadership in her, and she said, okay, I guess I can do it. I'm a waitress. I can get $5 from 50 people.

She probably spoke people every hour, Right?

Exactly. So Deb became an absolutely stellar public servant in the legislature in the state of Maine, and she even was asked to serve, and she served well on the Judiciary Committee and was reelected and reelected until she was wiped out, ultimately by dark money. So there is still this challenge to the clean election system. But more recently, I met a new young. This is an example of why clean elections, getting money out, can produce amazing results. Her name is Chloe Maxson, and she ran in a district not too far from Augusta, Maine, a district that she's 27 years old. And this is a district that is among the oldest in age of any district in the United States, and it has a strong Republican history. But she won on a green New Deal platform and then was able to introduce this into the state legislature and get support from the labor movement and ultimately pass a piece of legislation in Maine that will help in jobs and help in the climate crisis. And so here's an example of a young woman who could never have run if it had not been for clean elections. And. And because of her own values as a real. What I think of as a living Democrat, she went door to door to door to door. Something her team said. They knocked on 10,000 doors, right? And she went. I remember the story Chloe told me about going down a country dirt road in Maine, and this man in a trailer said, no one has ever come to my door and asked me what I thought. So it was very much. She was exactly the kind of candidate that I was hoping could run. Somebody who was really not just in meetings with donors, but going out and directly connecting with voters, with citizens in her district.

Right. So there's two parts of that story that I just want to tease out again, which is one, neither Deb nor Chloe would have been able to run without public financing. That public Maine's clean election system, which gives a block grant. If you collect a certain number of small donations, it funds your entire campaign. And after, in the 2000 and tens, it was updated to allow for a second grant, which Helped deal a little bit with this outside dark money problem that you mentioned that knocked Deb Simpson out of the legislature. But one it allows people who would never have been able to run to run because you don't need the old boys wealthy network, funder network to run for office anymore. But also once you're freed from the need to fundraise, you can actually finally go knock on doors and listen.

Right.

And you don't have to worried about will this person give me money? But it's what issues matter to you and what can I do to address those issues. And that's a profound way not only to clean up politics in terms of special interest influence in our, in our, you know, on our elected officials, but also to decrease the sense of alienation that voters feel. Because it does matter. If you've never been, you've never actually interacted with a candidate, if you've never had a candidate asking what you think, you don't really feel very attached to the system.

Exactly, exactly. And I'm sure those conversations she had then helped her craft legislation that was ultimately passed that includes, for example, solar on schools and real job training. So she was able to get, as I mentioned, the labor movement behind it because she was able to take the time because she was not just dialing for dollars. She, she was going door to door.

Right. So any other success stories you want to talk about?

Well, of course, I love the democracy vouchers in Seattle. Seattle. And that means that you get every,

every resident gets four $25 vouchers.

Right. And you can then assign those to the candidate of your choice. And the results have shown much greater participation of young people, of people of color, of low income people. And so I think it's, it's another approach that really gives people a sense of agency.

Right. And so, and so you, you were down in 2018, you went down to Florida and they were fighting for a constitutional amendment which they ended up winning to, to finally strike down a constitutional provision that barred, disenfranchised those convicted of a felony from ever voting again unless granted clemency by, individually by the government. Can you talk a little bit about what you saw down there?

Well, actually I was a phone banker.

You're a phone banker from here.

I didn't go, but I talked to a lot of people on the telephone and it was overwhelming support, overwhelming support for this. It just makes common sense to. It's a question of dignity. And I just saw a picture in the paper recently of someone whose voting rights were restored and he was Weeping. It was so emotional because it represented dignity. That's my interpretation of the course. So I think that now many people know that the powers that be in Florida have tried to push back by in effect presenting people with a poll tax because people coming out of prison, they don't have resources and yet they're told now that they have to repay, they have to complete their payment of fines and other costs before they actually have their rights restored. And I think that's something that we must fight. But as I talked to people, I just got such an overpowering sense that it made sense. I didn't expect it to pass as much as it did. Like 60, 64.5, 0.5% it needed to

hit 60% for a constitutional. So I mean it cleared it in a state like Florida. But I mean, I mean, is that a story that for you?

Absolutely. Oh, very, very much. And just that unity around such a big, big success.

Right, right. So I want to take it a little bit back to the claim of a democracy movement. Do you see? You know, on this podcast we've, we've told many, many different stories about, you know, successes. I mean, from automatic voter registration to same day registration to restoration of voting rights for those convicted of felonies, to public financing to gerrymandering reform like in Michigan. You know, the list goes on and on. Make the case to our listeners. Why do you see this as a democracy movement? I mean, because really what you're, what you're suggesting there is, it's a social movement. And in a previous episode I talked to Joan Mandel, the head of Democracy Matters, and she made the case that, you know, there is a movement, but a movement is needed. But what's, what's your take? Why is a movement needed? Is this a movement? And why do you, why do you think it's so important to label it as capital D, capital M democracy movement?

Well, this is why I love being an elder, because I can say that in my lifetime and it means something, that something has really changed. So I'm not making this up. I've lived through these many decades and I've never seen ever people coming together around system reforms for democracy, coming together across issues from the environmental movement to the labor movement to the racial justice movement, all coming together. And that's what I mean. That is definitely a first and that achieve real change. As you know, in the midterms, we have a fact sheet on our website@smallplanet.org that notes that in, I believe it's 18 cities and states and in one county, there were democracy reforms that passed that I believe. LARRY Lessig it's called the greatest single moment of democracy reform. And I believe it. It's quite extraordinary. And so that's why I don't think I'm just trying to make something happen by labeling it as a democracy movement. I believe that it is happening. And I also believe very much that because we're such social creatures, to really talk about it as a democracy movement is important, that we love to feel that we're something bigger than ourselves. And I know when you and I marched in Democracy Spring, that changed my life. I mean, I can have these ideas in my head and write my little handouts about the democracy movement, but actually knowing that I could march from Philadelphia to Washington and meet all these people I wouldn't have met otherwise and feel it in my cells that there is a movement, I've become more convincing to myself, and therefore, hopefully when I'm doing interviews, right.

And I think this is key, right. That the reason we call it a democracy movement, or I think others will call it the anti corruption movement, or however you want to phrase it, but really describing it as a movement, I think does produce tangible results. I think it creates, like a fear of missing out kind of thing.

Exactly.

You want to be part of the party.

Right. You have. Right.

And it also does signify that, you know, there, there's hope. I mean, you know, if there is a movement to address these core fundamental issues that we all recognize prevent progress on many, many different things, the simple fact that there's a movement should produce enough sense that there's a poss, you know, that there's a possibility of reform to then make that jump, make that leap, to then join the movement.

Right.

To then go out there and fight to knock doors like in Michigan, what they did to end gerrymandering or automatic voter registration or whatever. But I think that, you know, the sense of those small individual actions in whatever state you're in, that those are multiplied across 50 states and Washington, D.C. and that together they coalesce or can be combined into a larger movement, I think is critical.

You know, a metaphor that really helps me describe what we're talking about is this that you often hear people say disparagingly, oh, I'm just a drop in the bucket. Nothing much, doesn't matter much, but twist that around and think, oh, on a rainy night, a bucket fills up really fast. And so being a, being a drop is great if, if, if we can see the bucket. Right, Right. So I Think of the democracy movement. I think what. What I hear you saying is that democracy movement is the. That is the. It. It is the container in which all of these individual drops matter because they are filling up and they will overflow. Right, Right. So I think that's the beauty of our social nature, is we don't want to be missing out. And we need to know that our lives have meaning beyond ourselves. And so defining it as a movement is really important, and experiencing it. And so going out to events like we did in Democracy Spring and participating is a way to get it into our. Into our cells, so to speak, that we are part of something bigger than ourselves.

Right. And so for the listeners who haven't heard of Democracy Spring, it was a march in 2016. In April 2016, we marched from Philadelphia to Washington, D.C. about 150 of us. It was a whole 140ish miles. And then when we reached the Capitol steps, there were seven straight days of civil disobedience. Over 1200 people were arrested. And it really was this kind of.

For democracy.

For democracy. Right, right. For campaign finance, for voting rights. I mean, it really was this moment of. It was like an announcement of what I believe is a democracy movement, because there were over, I think, 200 organizations endorsing it across all different issues, you know, just like we were talking about. And that's really where this idea of. Our idea of that there's a movement of movements there because it was present. It was Democracy Spring and a subsequent action of Democracy Awakening, which was another coalition event. But, but I want to. You know, I wasn't going to ask this, but, you know, given what you. Your metaphor about the bucket, you have to describe to our listeners about Wangari. I think this is a great example of, you know, what can happen when one small act leads to many, many others.

Well, Adam knows that my hero of all heroes, my lodestar of courage. I call her one garmentai. We lost her in 2013, but she was a Nobel Peace Prize winner. Why? Well, on Earth Day in the early 70s or the mid-70s, she planted seven trees to honor environmental activists in Kenya and went on then to found the Green Belt movement. And when my daughter and I interviewed her in the year 2000 for our book Hope's Edge 21, what was it? I've forgotten the number, but 21 million trees had been planted by this movement of village women. And she then helped inspire Plant for the Planet movement that you can go on that website now, and it's the billions, something like 13, 14 billion trees. And so she's always been for me, she faced incredible humiliation, attack, beatings for her activism for the most basic challenge of how do we prevent the desert from taking over and ruining our lives? There in. In Kenya was her focus on restoring the earth. So how those individual acts then add up and up and up beyond anything that we could ever imagine. And so I always like to remind anyone who will listen to me that fundamentally what we're talking about is doing that which we thought we could not do. Certainly that was when Gari, for me and Adam and I end our book, Daring Democracy, saying that in such a time that we are alive, that being a good person isn't quite good enough anymore, that we have to find our courage to do that which we thought we could not do. And one way we do that, I like to say, is hang out with courage, is because we're social animals. We'll absorb the energy and commitment of people around us. And that's why the democracy movement is so important in that march. I didn't think could do that, you know, but once I did, I thought, oh, I can do something else that I'm scared of. So I think that theme of courage, civil courage, we call it, is foundational to where we are right now as a people and to support one another in community to do the most courageous acts that we can. And now for me, they have to do with courageous acts to create actual democracy that is accountable to us and to future generations.

Right. And there's no way to know, you know, what one act will lead to. I mean, I don't think the organizers of Democracy Spring. I mean, I think they hoped that it would. It would cause a mass protest and lead to the fixing of our democracy. Obviously, that wasn't necessarily going to happen, but what it did do is it brought so many different people together and inspired people to believe that, you know, there was a movement.

Exactly. And I'll never forget when we arrived in Washington, greeting us the day after in the visitor center there, who spoke to us but John Sarbanes. And here we are now, these Years later, an HR1 past the house. John Sarbanes put it together. And a package that includes the kind of thing that I was raving about with my friend Chloe Maxman or Deb Simpson, enabling them in Maine to run for office and be stellar legislators. So think about that. You know, that since that moment, did we really think, Adam, when we arrived in Washington and listened to John Sarbanes, that, you know, a few years later, that this would actually gain national attention.

No. And that the Democrats would put it first. I mean, it's a remarkable moment to think that in the handful of years that you and I have been a part of this movement that, you know, we're not at the point where one political party is putting process reforms as the, the, the top priority of the new Congress. And that we've had, you know, I think by our count, on equal citizens, POTUS, one website, I think it's. We have 10 candidates now who have agreed that their first act would be democracy reform.

I'm so glad that you're doing that. Yeah.

I mean, it's, It's. It's truly remarkable. I mean, I'm not going to say it's quite the, the, you know, we're not at the point where we can look back and say, well, seven true trees turned into 13 billion. But clearly there is momentum building. And I think that that's the thing that you are so good at recognizing, is kind of really taking a step back and looking at the broader picture of progress and that no matter how dispirited we are, we should recognize that just in the little bit of time that, you know, you've been observing this, we've seen tremendous change.

Absolutely.

And, you know, I think, you know, Larry Hoffman talks about this, that he's been doing this for over a decade, and he's more optimistic. He does use the word optimistic. He's more optimistic than he's ever been because he, too, when you've been in the movement for a decade, you can recognize how much has changed since you first started. And I think that is, you know, again, for our listeners who are feeling so dispirited and depressed with how everything is going, there's rightfully reason to be depressed, but I think it's holding that kind of depressed feeling with also the sense of possibility created by this, you know, the amazing, amazing grassroots activists across the country. I mean, it's truly. I mean, and that's one of the reasons why I love doing this podcast, and I know Larry does, too. And Jason, that, you know, talking to the folks on the ground and hearing about the amazing work they're doing, I mean, there's. There is nothing, I think this is fair to say, more inspiring than that. I mean, I think of Katie Fahey and in Michigan, with one figure, Facebook post. You know, turning a Facebook post into a statewide movement, a nonpartisan statewide movement to end gerrymandering, to get it on the ballot, the independent redistricting commissions, and then to get it passed overwhelmingly, I Mean, who would have thought that was possible? I mean, talk about. She didn't even need a sense of possibility in that sense. She just, she just jumped. Not everyone can. Can jump without that sense of possibility, but she created her own possibility. And I think that's the message for or any one of our listeners of this podcast or anyone in the country. Not everyone can be a Katie Fahey, but everyone can play a part in a larger struggle that can achieve many of the same things that Katie or the folks in Maine with ranked choice voting or whomever and wherever have accomplished that. We don't all need to be the ones leading the charge, but we all can be a drop in the bucket. And at the end of the day, that bucket is filled up and eventually we'll have a democracy.

And I want to add here that we haven't manifest it yet, but part of what I hope to help create, or we are creating, I must say, with democracy initiative that will go live early in the next year is one website where anyone can go at democracymovement Us. Anybody can go there and scroll over a map of the states to where you live and see what recent victories have happened, what major campaigns are underway, and who you can connect with. So this hopefully will be another expanding opportunity for each of us to find that connection. And so I just wanted to throw that in, too.

Yes, I had it in here. I had it in my show notes that I was going to give you a chance to promote that by the time this episode goes live, I don't think the website will be up, but I do encourage everyone to. To check it out and wait for when it does come up.

All you have to remember is democracymovement Us.

Yeah, exactly. And, you know, I think it'll be a really great resource because I do think as a community, I don't think that, you know, we democracy reformers do a good enough job touting our successes. You know, I think that the story, I mean, I think of the Deb Simpson story all the time. And I know, you know, that I use it in speeches all the time, that, you know, it's just, it's a story of success. And it's not to say that the public financing system in Maine is perfect and that it's produced perfect results. Quite the contrary. The point, though, is that it has the potential to really change the game in terms of who's elected, in terms of who the elected officials are listening to. And it's not a perfect system, but it's a more perfect system.

Yes, yes.

And I think that's the key. So Frankie, I want to give you some time to talk about this new project that you're working on, a new book. I'll let you introduce the title and you're really addressing the way that Americans are facing, facing three fundamental crises and how they all intersect democracy, economic inequality and climate change.

Yes, I am working on a book with Bob Massey, who ran for governor of Massachusetts and expert in climate change and economic justice. And he and I teamed up and our title is It's Not Too Late and our subtitle is is Crisis and Opportunity and the Power of Hope. The thesis is that the climate crisis, because it threatens life on earth is such an emergency that it will crack open possibility to go to the roots of our economic and our political brokenness. Because many people are catching on certainly with the current administration is proof positive that we can't address the climate crisis without democracy and certainly our extreme economic inequality. I want to underscore we're not just extremely unequal relative to say Western Europe, but worldwide we are at an extreme. So that is the thesis and the story. It's a story driven book about how it starts with climate crisis. A story driven book at how people are actually at city and state level even though we don't have national leadership now, but are making significant changes. There are over 100 cities that have set the goal of clean energy and statesmany of them red states. My home state of Texas. Turns out if Texas were a country we'd be be the fifth largest wind producer in the entire world. And how that happened and how it is possible even as I say in Republican controlled states that tend to be more of the climate resistors, the urgency of it that incredible steps are being taken that we can all participate and speed up and then as we move the federal government into a new place that we can really take off. So it's a book of possibilities.

And I know the story of Richmond, California is really emblematic for you because they did kind of address each of these three core crises simultaneously.

There are in the process it is still incredibly under the thumb of the fossil fuel and the Chevron distilleries are still a terrible health threat. But the reason that Richmond is so interesting is that the city council now there is a public financing mechanism so that you don't have to raise big bucks and you therefore don't have to be dependent on the oil industry to get on the city council. And they have also made other reforms addressing economic inequality. It's one of the few places that actually has rent control on certain number of units that is really making a difference in people's quality of life. So I honor them because they are stepping up. Not that they have solved these problems, certainly not the environmental one around fossil fuel, but they are stepping up and challenging the power structure as it has been so destructive.

And one of the things I really appreciate about this thesis is that one of the biggest problems with democracy organizing is that it's very hard to talk about process issues when, and you know, you're, you're in the shadow of Chevron and breathing in, you know, noxious gas or, you know, you, you can't afford rent, or you're paying 60% of your income and rent or whatever it is. I mean, when you're dealing with what traditionally you would call bread and butter issues, you know, pertaining to your basic well being, it's really hard to go take a week off or 10 days off to go do a democracy spring march from Philadelphia to D.C. i mean, you just can't. And so one of the things that's, so, I think critical about this thesis is that, you know, we, we also have to as a community address the pain and suffering folks are feeling. And one of the things that you and I have written about is, you know, you know, especially on things like police brutality and, and other issues of civil rights, that it's awfully hard to do democracy organizing if you can't, you know, go out onto the streets because of the color your skin and not be worried about being physically harmed. And so I think that that's something that we constantly have to be thinking about as is that like, as a community, as a democracy reform community, how do we engage in deeper organizing that recognizes the need for democracy reform, but also how we stand up for other vulnerable communities to allow them the space to then have more freedom to fight for democracy too.

And I think Richmond, California you brought up is a powerful example of that. I highly recommend a book called Refinery Town. And one of the things I learned there is not only the kinds of initiatives that I just spoke of, but also reforming the police department and leadership and the way that the police relate to the community. And it's been, you know, nothing is perfect, but there's been much more accountability and much more trust built because that was part of, it wasn't just the environmental question or the funding of elections question. It was also the question of racial discrimination and other related issues in policing. So to see this is all connected, I think is really the place to begin.

Right, right, right, absolutely. I couldn't agree more. So, Frankie, you're an avid reader. Obviously you're an author of many books. But without mentioning your own books, what are some of the books that you think that our audience should read to get a better understanding of our democracy crisis and the solutions? And obviously, Larry's new book is fantastic. If you haven't read it yet, they Don't Represent Us. Highly recommend. Apart from that, Frankie, what are you thinking about right now?

Well, I remember in writing during democracy saying to myself over and over that I couldn't have done this. We couldn't have done this without Jane Mayer's book, Dark Money. Very, very powerful, very readable. After I finished my work with you on that, the first book I read was Democracy in Chains. Nancy Maclean. Powerful, powerful book. More recently, Josh Douglas, who's a friend

of this podcast, who's a friend of

the podcast, Vote for us. And the reason I love Josh's book is because it is full of stories such as the one Adam briefly described as the Katie Fahey story in Michigan. Michigan. So I think Josh is very much in line with everything that I'm saying today. So those are books that come to mind, and I'm eager to see the next match.

Yeah, I mean, there are so many great books coming out. And I think the really exciting thing is that, you know, we talked about earlier, that we really do have a problem with telling the success stories. And I think there are more and more books coming out or will be coming out that do outline some of the success stories, because that's something we really have to put forward. So, Frankie, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. I really appreciate it.

Well, it has been fun. Especially fun for me because actually Another Way is my favorite podcast that I listen to.

That's high praise. Frankie. Thanks so much.

You're so welcome.

This has been another episode of Another Way. Thank you so much for listening.

Sa.