Top 3 Pieces of Legislation

And, to at least be more in line with clearly suggesting my top three:

Student Debt Cancellation (or even more general debt cancellation, such as economic bill of rights).

John Lewis Voting Rights Act

anything/something anticorruption.

1 Like

Part A) Spotlight Bill is what I was referring to, stop dark money.
I had forgotten about the call for a national voting holiday, it would be a great benefit but would garner massive conservative opposition I think.
Getting people who are normally our opposition to join us in passing legislation would definitely be a game changer, and absolutely something to build on. It isn’t possible for us to know what all roadblocks we’ll face, but this is still just the first step on a long walk. We aren’t deciding an absolute path, just a direction. Top 3 to discuss and come to an agreement on.


It’s looking like right now DACA and the John Lewis act are 2 very good possibilities for what we go with. IF that is true then it leaves one more spot up for grabs. Both Paid Family Leave and Student Debt Cancelation seem like they are up there to be considered for the third.

I spent some time looking over the suggestions so far and the post by @over9000 seems to overlap the most suggestions made by others.

I think this might be the path forward for now. I think Medicare for all should be our 4th if there is one and it makes a bit of sense to position it that way due to entanglements to industry.

Does anyone object to this direction?

Oh I I think anti-corruption should include preservation and extension of voting rights perhaps.

I love to see it! :+1:

I read this one that @over9000 gave a shout out. The Spotlight Bill

1 Like

In order of importance for me and the 3 things that I think we can bring voters together. I have ordered them in what I think will get the most bi-partisan action in my state from most to least

  1. Paid Family Leave
  2. Campaign Finance reform (I wish us all luck on this one…our reps are going to fight to the death to keep from happening)
  3. Immigration Reform

It looks to me now that we’ve narrowed it down to these 3 in no particular order:

  1. Paid Family Leave
  2. Campaign Finance/Anti-Corruption laws
  3. Immigration reform

If I don’t hear any replies by the time TDR starts then I am going to tag Alison with this as our 3

@alison_hartson In no particular order:

  1. Paid Family Leave
  2. Campaign Finance/Anti-Corruption laws
  3. Immigration reform
1 Like

I would say honorable mentions to:

  1. Voting rights
  2. Medicare for all.

We could treat these issues as being in the hopper so to speak.

@here You did it! Thank you ALL for stepping up this weekend to make this discussion lively and productive. Now that we have our top three, it’s time to explain what the legislation is and why you think it should be the one we focus on.

I’m going to create a new thread so that we can have another focused discussion around this, Stay tuned…


Aaaaaand here’s the link to the next part of our discussion: Rationale for Top 3 Pieces of Legislation

See you over there @here!

1 Like

It sounds like you have the first part of your response correct!

As for the second half, if I’m understanding you correctly, you’re recommending that in addition to a campaign that Operation Hope focuses on, people are also invited to focus on other areas if they don’t want to organize around that mission, or in addition to. For example, people may want to collab with a sub-team that focuses on in-person actions, another on online activism, another on letter-writing campaigns. Do I have that right?


I think so. Though also, for example, the types of activism people can contribute to would inform what tactical resources are more or less available to operation hope, which in turn also informs what strategies we could or not implement, which in turn informs which ideas / legislation are in fact most feasible for us.

And not only in this direction, since I’m talking about a system of operations. For another example (of that reversed), say we have a legislative goal, and those with expertise collaborating on that specific legislative issue determine that a specific type of activism would greatly serve its strategic implementation; then the development of this legislation also informs the value of so broadening our potential activist operations, which expands our strategic options (potentially viable for other legislative ideas), and ultimately grows the overall scope of our potential in general.

In other words, without organizing to leverage this system feedback: we may not prioritize some specific legislation, which then may leave us uninformed on what tactics it could best use, which then may leave us underdeveloped on a specific form of activism, which then may leave some other completely random legislation options underdeveloped because we presumed we lacked capacity in said specific activism tactic said other random legislations may need, which then may leave us uninformed on which legislations would’ve been relatively most feasible for us, which then ultimately limits the scope of our potential in general.

So basically, not only what you just summarized, but also how such an organizational structure enables various operations to interconnect, and ultimately empower each other to increase our overall potential.

All this said, I do think just starting with a legislative goal, as we are, is probably a good way to hash out such potential organizational adjustments. Obviously, we would find in practice that my perspective on what we could do will be flawed or simply just not optimal in some ways.

Here I will clarify some of my assumptions. @alison_hartson mentioned people not wanting to organize around a specific mission, and I would first clarify; my assumption, (if projection), is that a person not wanting to organize on a specific issue is expected to be a well informed choice, (for example, I wouldn’t know much how to develop strategy for specifically M4A legislation). Further, in terms of organizational efficiency, the marginal utility of a person working on a project for which they are ill suited would seem to me to waste their more effective work on a project for which they are better suited. And given our community is voluntary, if we don’t enable our community to work where they fit, then our focus of them into where they don’t fit may discourage them entirely. Next, (similarly to how solving climate change has no silver bullet, and will take all available options), I expect our politics needs work on all the issues our community thinks we could help develop. Also, we would ideally find general tactics and strategies (leveraging specialized and focused groups) viable for multiple legislative issues. Lastly, I expect we would find myriad legislative issues for general development within our community’s interests, as well as interests in specific operations which leverage organizational focus (such as activism tactics), as well as interests in general operations (such as how @fourthwall_dragon among others has helped our community to coordinate and communicate).

To illustrate further how such general development separate from focused development operations can empower each other, we may find a viable strategy may be to develop two or three legislative options for each federal issue (as our community develops them both generally and with focused teams), then we offer the sufficiently developed legislative options to the public discourse (via focused media tactics), and then also time our (obviously focused) activism pressure such that political campaigns stand to gain from adopting our continuously developed legislations, (perhaps on a specific legislative issue the campaign in question is sensitive to). We may also find this strategy is limited in some ways, and thus how some legislative issues differ in nature and solution. In this example, the operations of media tactics, legislation development, activism, political targeting, meta-learning, etc. could not have been us focused on organizing around specific legislations, and are in fact products of both focused and general operation development.

Anyway, I’m probably being too long winded again. Hopefully my suggestions are interesting at least <3

#1 is Public funding of elections. Until we get this done we have no hope of passing any other meaningful legislation.

1 Like

At this point, the voting does not warrant details in my opinion since we don’t really know where this is going. However, I would like to see a system for casting our votes that does not require making a list, when a list is already made. I came here looking to contribute, and I am seeing a lot of input, with little guidance and collaboration. It’s a big endeavor, so I’m not surprised! My problem with providing details is that I would have to spend more time digging into each thread, and they appear to be long and jump around on subjects from what I’ve seen. Otherwise, I would oblige you. Once we have a more focused direction, I will be more willing to elaborate.


@isp We have made separate threads for each of the 3 issues in order for everyone to discuss them.

Paid Family Leave - Operation Hope - Paid Family Leave
Anti Corruption/Campaign Finance - Operation Hope - Anti Corruption/Campaign Finance
Immigration Reform - Operation Hope - Immigration Reform

You can discuss each issue and ideas for how to fight/improve them in those threads and also discuss all three in general in the Top 3 issues thread here: :Rationale for Top 3 Pieces of Legislation - #3