These are the only two things I'd say if I were running for office right now
It doesn't matter where. In a big liberal metropolis. In a rural conservative county. Literally anywhere where people deserve a better life
Before going any further, that title isn’t a “some personal news…” tease. I have no plans to run for elected office. When it comes to building a livable future for all of us, we’ve all got our part, and I’m pretty committed to the one I’m playing. Plus, last I checked, the biggest problem facing the American body politic wasn’t insufficient representation from guys like me (white men over the age of 40 who were once high school debaters).
As we roll into the latter half of 2025, though, more and more people are going to toss their hats into all sorts of rings. Local and special elections this year. Midterms next year. Elections even further out than that? I suppose. There are always so many campaigns. Some of those candidates (perhaps all of them) don’t care about the opinions of a painfully earnest dad/newsletter author in Milwaukee (“so wait, that’s your job?” the candidates might ask me, as I look down at my feet sheepishly). But, in a country where freedom is eroding every day, one of our few remaining ones is our ability to give unsolicited advice to both prospective and current elected officials. We no longer have the rule of law, but we can still yell at our mayors. So here I stand. Exercising this particular unalienable right, while I still have it.
Or, I will be, in a second. First, some context.
I could be writing this any day, filled as I’m sure it will be with all sorts of freshly horrific news pegs. But as it happens, it has already been a bad week for those of us who still wish for a kinder, gentler country. Yesterday, the Supreme Court announced that the Trump administration can proceed with its plans to dismantle the Department of Education. It’s a terrible ruling, but it doesn’t occur in a vacuum. Do you know what else doesn’t occur in a vacuum? A Department of Homeland Security that can’t be bothered to save Texans in a flood but which has plenty of time to erect concentration camps with jokey names and branded merch. There is, increasingly, only one Federal agency and its job is to lock up people who speak Spanish in public.
If only all this were solely the fault of indidual malevolent actors. If only we could cast a spell to ward off Donald Trump and John Roberts and Kristi Noem and be done with this mess. Sadly, it was never that simple. We are stuck in this moment, with this cast of characters, because of a fifty year project to delegitimize government, to convince us that the only thing we can expect from the public sector is carceral punishment, state violence and (now, a new innovation) social media trolling from official accounts.
If you are reading this and you agree with Amerca’s grand anti-public works project, if Reagan’s line about how the worst words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help” speaks to your soul, then I hate to say it, but you’ve won this round. You’ve been winning rounds for decades now. You’ve won rounds every Republican administration and most of the Democratic ones. You’ve won in the days of David Stockman and starving the beast and Bill Clinton and welfare reform and Donald Trump and the DOGE boys. You win every time candidate Trump spins conspiracy theories about what the feds are hiding for you and then President Trump tries to soft shoe his way around the fact that he, in fact, is the Deep State obfuscater doing the hiding (I am talking about Epstein but I could be talking about any number of things). You win every time a budget gets passed kicking moms off of SNAP, and every time somebody replies to Zohran Mamdani’s proposals for city-run grocery stores with the old trope about how horrific it would be if retail establishments were run like the DMV.
Oh man I promise I’m almost to the part where I give advice to candidates but first, I need to rant about that tired joke about the Department of Motor Vehicles.
My friends, have you dealt with a corporation in the last decade? Have you shopped at a Kroger-owned grocery store or attempted to call Verizon or Comcast or tried to purchase shaving cream at Walgreens or, I don’t know, FLOWN ON AN AIRPLANE? I would take a day at the DMV over every single one of those experiences. It’s not even close. I’ve had good moments at the DMV and bad moments at the DMV, but even my worst ones could have all been corrected if the employees working there were both fairly compensated and regularly asked “what could we change about your working environment that would make providing this vital public service easier for you?”
The Milwaukee DMV does its best. It is roomy and the seating is comfortable enough and there are TVs. It shares a shopping center with a Chuck E Cheese, which means that if you had to take your kids with you to an appointment, theoretical fun could be had afterwards. In the other corner, do you know how I feel every time I wait in a fifty person long grocery line? Like I’m being subjected to an elaborate form of torture by McKinsey consultant. “What’s the exact amount of profit maximization we can squeeze in here before they all revolt?” asks the Wharton MBA, efficiently.
Leave the DMV alone, is my point. It’s fine. Sometimes great, in spite of the abuse it takes. Definitely not the worst.
There are many reasons why the dismantlers of government keep winning. Weaponized white grievance politics will get you part of the way, as will big money (laundered through both parties). But that side also beats us rhetorically. They set the terms. We accept them. Think about the Department of Education. We say “you’re attacking public schools, Pell Grants, and Title I funding” and they reply, disingenuously, “of course we aren’t, we just believe that decisions should be made as close to parents and students as possible.” Then their counter: “What are you defending? An acronym? A soulless bureaucracy? A brutalist building in D.C.?”
We argue back, but we’re already on our back heal. They say “we promise that we’re not going to touch the parts of the Department of Education that people like.” And of course it’s a lie. Those funds have already gotten lost in the mail. But it’s often enough to win the discursive battle. “You’re defending a waste machine whose functions could be much more efficiently run elsewhere,” they charge. In response, we blubber. Sometimes, the less convicted amongst us grant them the point. “Well, we can cut the fat, just don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.” Is that what Abundance is about? I have not read Abundance. Great cover. And I definitely agree that California should build more houses and finish that train. But you see how quickly we can get distracted.
By the time we’re debating which functions of education should be handled by the states, what began as a passionate conversation has eroded into mush.
What we should say is that The Department of Education doesn’t exist because we, the defenders of government, love concrete buildings and excess paper work. It exists because of social movements that believed that government should do more, both to make life better for all of us, and to correct for hopelessly rigged systems. The United States first started federalizing education services in 1866. Reconstruction. An era of dreams eventually deferred, but at least spoken out loud. An age where important questions were asked. Like, for instance, “what does the Federal government owe all of our children?” An era when it was especially clear what “states’ rights” meant (to do what, exactly? oh, THAT?!?) and why centralization of care might be a good idea. There was backlash to that, of course, and it took nearly another hundred years for social movements to build up an effective counter. The Great Society didn’t just happen, nor did the long tail of Great Society-endebted domestic investments of the 1970s. When the Department of Education finally became a cabinet level agency in 1979, it was the fulfillment of a hundred year project. Perhaps we could be a country that gave a damn about all kids, especially poor kids, Black and Brown kids, kids with disabilities. Perhaps.
As soon as it was imagined, the backlash began. Libertarians and corporatists set their sights on its elimination, and never wavered. Not because they actually hate sprawling bureaucracies housed in brutalist office buildings (see: Defense, Department of), but because they were driven by an idea. Government shouldn’t help people. In fact, it should barely exist.
We are not defenders of acronyms. We too are defenders of an idea. Or we should be, at least.
That’s to say, if I were running for office right now, regardless of the demographics of the area in which I was campaigning, I’d have a single message. I’d repeat it at every door, every parade, and every endorsement meeting. It would come in two parts, a statement and a question. I would elaborate, but not through wonky position papers.
I’d say…
I want government to help more people, and to harm fewer people.
And then I’d ask…
If the government were to do something tomorrow that would have a direct positive impact on your life, what would it be?
That’s all. Over and over again. I would take notes. Sometimes my prospective constituents might ask me “but do you think that government should help trans kids or immigrants?” I would say “yes, of course, and I also think they should help you, and I think we are capable of doing all those things at once.” Maybe they’d throw a gotcha and ask “what about helping billionaires?” and I’d say “until I hear the billionaires ask for something that will also make life easier for all of us, I’m not convinced that there’s much we can do for them. We do need to tax them, though. They literally have more money than they can spend in a lifetime.”
No doubt, people would ask about all sorts of things, to which I’d answer “yes, the government should do that.” Fix potholes and also build high speed trains? Yes, both those things. Free college and also free technical school? Absolutely. Free child care and baby boxes and lead pipe replacement and muscular support for labor unions against the bosses? The world’s coolest playgrounds (perhaps one of those next to the DMV)? Yes, yes, yes, and yes. If they were to follow up and say “but you know that list is unrealistic, given our political climate?” I’d say “right now, that seems to be the case, but I promise to both fight really hard for them and, more importantly, to keep you updated on what I’m doing to push and how you can help.”
I suspect the “how do you pay for it?” question would come up. To that, I’d respond, “these things we’ve just named, would they make your life better? If yes, how can we afford not to pay for them? You’re worth it, you see. We all are.”
Some times, if I were to ask people, “what can we do to help you?” they might say “I want you to deport somebody,” or “I want to take away somebody else’s healthcare,” or “I’d like you to prevent poor people from living in my vicinity,” to which I’d reply “you misunderstood my question. I asked how the government could make your life better, not how it could harm another human being. I am not running to hurt somebody on your behalf, nor do I think that will help you find what you’re seeking.”
I probably won’t win that person’s vote, in this hypothetical situation. I might not win enough votes at all. And that would be disappointing, because included in the long list of work that we need to do together is the cold hard reality that we should win more elections. But winning the election wouldn’t be the whole point. Movement building is narrative building and narratives are strengthened when we win and when we lose, as long as we do both with integrity.
For fifty years, the people who hate government and would like it to wither away have been winning. Truth be told, they still have us on the defensive. So let’s not pretend otherwise. We’re rebuilding. Not just our political power, but our confidence in an idea.
Government, here in the United States, has never been fully benevolent. It has never solely helped. It has caused far too much harm. But that need not always be the case. We could have the government of our dreams. But only if we start dreaming out loud.
End notes:
Speaking of people running for office, in addition to Zohran (of course), this is the soon-to-be-nationalized race that has me the most excited. is the real deal. This special election will be a hard flip, but how monumental would it be won by a pissed off social worker/organizer running to fix roads, feed kids and fund hospitals? She’s worth your support, and your attention.
On the subject of Zohran (whom my kids know as “my guy, Zohran”), blame him for the fact that I’ve finally entered the world of more regular front facing videos. Here I am, on TikTok (may God have mercy on our souls) with some thoughts that eventually inspired this essay.
Movement building is hard work, and it doesn’t happen if we fail to wrap our hands around each other. These days, we need to ask for help when we need it and provide it when we can. I try to do my part to make this a space that helps you all keep going and fighting. In exchange, the best way to support me is to become a paid subscriber. It helps keeps the lights on, both literally and figuratively. Sharing these pieces with friends helps too.
As you likely know, I’ve been running a summer movie series (movies from the past decade that say something interesting about this era we’ve shared— like Inside Out, for instance, a movie about feelings for an age of feelings). The last couple have been live chats for paid subscribers (here’s one on Arrival and another on Get Out), but this Thursday I’m very excited to host an absolute barnburner of a guest essay on Crazy Rich Asians from longtime reader and friend Maureen Tang. Your support helps me compensate Maureen for her time and wisdom.
There’s another protest day on the 17th. Good Trouble day, they’re calling it. Odds are, there’s one near you. Get out there, friends!
This is a repeat song of the week, but it remains undefeated on this general subject. Once again, I defer to Randy Newman, and to the delegate from Utah, the friendly Beehive State.
100% here — reminds me of the great piece from Tressie McMilan Cottom piece on why the DMV is great, actually, because there is no jumping the line for rich folks who want to pretend service doesn’t take effort (gift link) https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/07/31/opinion/dmv-inequality.html?unlocked_article_code=1._U0.HbmH.1NH75DP87-9p
"I have not read Abundance. Great cover. And I definitely agree that California should build more houses and finish that train. But you see how quickly we can get distracted." I laughed out loud.
And yes to the overarching message of the piece. It would be nice to have more candidates speak clearly and unapologetically on behalf of public goods.