A Winning Strategy for Larry Lessig Even If He Loses in Running for Congress Here in California

Our political process desperately needs more people willing to get involved, get their hands dirty, and run for office. Being an elected official is a tough, demanding lifestyle, and there is no more sincere way you can express a desire for change than putting yourself forward as a candidate.

It is even more admirable that he is running on being intellectually honest with the public and trying to explain why our political system produces the results it does. His analysis does not distill well into sound bites -- but frankly, nothing that can be expressed in 30 seconds has the capacity to change Washington. It's a complicated problem, and requires complicated solutions. Treating the voters like grown-ups is a great place to start.

Lessig is announcing around March first whether he will be running for Congress. Jackie Speier, a former state senator and candidate for Lt. Governor, has already announced that she is running. Jackie Speier is like a cross between Tupac and Al Gore -- a butt-kicking progressive who has taken bullets for her lifestyle. She is a dedicate public servant, an experienced politician, well-liked by liberals, and well known in the district. Few people who know the district well would put money on Lessig's chances of beating a candidate like her.

From the moment Lessig jumps in his every policy position will be scrutinized -- and not in a nice, "let's have a debate" kind of way.
The life of a candidate is tough. People will impugn his motives and attack his integrity. As a first time candidate, he will likely think this is unfair. And anyone with Lessig's record has a right to think personal attacks are unfair -- he is a legitimate hero to progressive politics.

On the other hand, there are many progressives in this area who are inherently suspicious of someone who decides to run against Jackie Speier, and perhaps they are right to feel that way -- if the solution is running against Jackie Speier, you're probably looking at the wrong problem. There are a lot of worse people in Congress -- people who desperately need someone with the courage to jump in and run against them.

Lessig's thoughtful and complex analysis of how to fix Washington might get lost in the mix. Unfortunately, our culture loves dreamers, idealists, and activists, but distrusts politicians -- unfortunately because the political process is how many of these dreams and ideals are advanced. It's a catch-22 to enter the political process -- you have a chance to put your ideas into practice, but in return, all of a sudden, nobody believes you mean what you say.

Here's a win-win strategy for Lessig: rather than decide to be in or out, define a set of policy positions and practices, challenge Speier to adopt them, and pledge to run against her if and only if she does not. This has a number of advantages:

(1) It gets the press to talk about issues. There is nothing the media hates more than covering an issue, especially when the issue relates to "process." It's much easier to cover who is winning and losing, or who said what about who. If he adopts this strategy, they can't help but cover his ideas, at least in some sort of perfunctory way.

(2) If Speier says yes, he's made positive change. Everybody goes home happier.

(3) If Speier says no, it makes the case for his candidacy. Nobody is left wondering why a guy who is relatively new to the district is running for an office like Congress against a progressive hero. He's already explained why he's running -- and the ball was in her court to stop it.

(4) It's a strategy that leads really well into a strong issue campaign and into a strong congressional campaign. He can earn media by demanding debates over the issues he's brought up, build an email list by circulating petitions, and raise money for issue advocacy direct mail. It builds a public profile for him if he chooses to jump into the race, and if he doesn't end up running, he can use the media profile, donor base, and contact list he built to advocate for political reform in the future.

(5) It redefines the story away from the ambitious but politically naive professor who gets his butt kicked -- a story that doesn't help anyone.

My guess is that, at the end of the day, Jackie Speier wins the seat by a wide margin and is a fantastic representative. I don't live in the district, but if I did, Jackie Speier would have my vote. She's great.

But I admire Lessig for jumping into the political process and wish him success in the changes he is sincerely hoping to make. If he circulates a petition asking Jackie Speier to stop raising money from lobbyists and pledge to support publicly financed elections, I'll be the first one to sign.

Kai Stinchcombe is a founder of The Roosevelt Institution, a non-profit, non-partisan national network of campus-based student think tanks, and a PhD student at Stanford University.