Podcast appearances and mentions of vanessa williamson

Why do people hate taxes but seem proud to pay them? When did taxation in the US become such a lightning rod issue? And are American feelings about taxes unique? Today Zachary and Emma talk to Vanessa Williamson, senior fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution and a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The discussion weaves through taxation, redistribution, and political participation.  What Could Go Right? is produced by The Progress Network and The Podglomerate. For transcripts, to join the newsletter, and for more information, visit: theprogressnetwork.org Watch the podcast on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/theprogressnetwork And follow us on X, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok: @progressntwrk Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As the United States faces into a number of consequential elections including the Presidential Election in 2024, along with elections to Congress as well as several gubernatorial elections, the shape of the political landscape in the United States both during the election campaigns and after the political dust has settled will be highly significant for the future of the country's democracy. In her address to the IIEA, Vanessa Williamson, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, assesses the possible consequences of the 2024 elections for the resilience of the institutions which underpin the US' democracy. About the Speaker: Vanessa Williamson is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at Brookings, and a Senior Fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. She studies taxation, redistribution, democracy, and political participation. She is the author, with Theda Skocpol, of The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.

Fareed Zakaria says yes. But it's not just political revolution — it's economic, technological, even emotional. He doesn't offer easy solutions but he does offer some hope. SOURCES:Fareed Zakaria, journalist and author. RESOURCES:Age of Revolutions: Progress and Backlash from 1600 to the Present, by Fareed Zakaria (2024)."The Ultimate Election Year: All the Elections Around the World in 2024," by Koh Ewe (TIME, 2023)."The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism," by Vanessa Williamson, Theda Skocpol, and John Coggin (Perspectives on Politics, 2011).The Post-American World, by Fareed Zakaria (2008).The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad, by Fareed Zakaria (2003). EXTRAS:"Is the U.S. Really Less Corrupt Than China?" by Freakonomics Radio (2021).

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) was signed into law almost one year ago, but Americans are still learning how this giant legislative package impacts them. With provisions targeting different sectors of the economy, the IRA has focused most prominently on clean energy investments, prescription drug pricing, and funding for the IRS. And to learn what research can tell us about these major provisions, we spoke to experts who study each of these issue areas. Professor Matto Mildenberger took on the climate provisions, Professor Soumitra Bhuyan discussed health care, and Vanessa Williamson analyzed the increase in IRS funding. Enjoy this jam-packed special edition of No Jargon to celebrate 250 episodes! For more of Matto Mildenberger's work: Check out his book Carbon Captured: How Business and Labor Control Climate Politics. For more of Soumitra Bhuyan's work: Read his paper, co-written by Shiyanbola O, Deka P, Isehunwa OO, Chandak A, Huang S, Wang Y, Bhatt J, Ning L, Lin WJ, and Wyant D: The role of gender in cost-related medication nonadherence among patients with diabetes.  For more of Vanessa Williamson's work: Read her book, Read My Lips: Why Americans are Proud to Pay Their Taxes

Sean Goode and Rebecca Thornton from Choose 180 stop by to share how to transform systems of harm and injustice - by supporting young people impacted by them as well as their own staff in doing this work. They discuss a better world where neighborhoods are resourced, generative programs are co-created, and the humanity of those accused of causing harm is centered alongside the healing of those who are harmed. Such a world is not as far off as one may think, but does require the transfer of power to those closest to the pain and a long-enough runway to have lasting effects. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal, on Twitter at @finchfrii, find Sean at @GraceNotGuilt, and Choose 180 at @ICHOOSE180   Resources Choose 180: https://choose180.org/   “A King County nonprofit raised all staff salaries to $70,000 minimum. Will more organizations follow?” by Naomi Ishisaka from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/labor-shortage-or-living-wage-shortage-one-king-county-nonprofit-is-taking-a-different-approach/   "Disparities in Wealth by Race and Ethnicity in the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances" by Neil Bhutta, Andrew C. Chang, Lisa J. Dettling, and Joanne W. Hsu for FEDS Notes: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/disparities-in-wealth-by-race-and-ethnicity-in-the-2019-survey-of-consumer-finances-20200928.htm   “Closing the racial wealth gap requires heavy, progressive taxation of wealth” by Vanessa Williamson from The Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/research/closing-the-racial-wealth-gap-requires-heavy-progressive-taxation-of-wealth/   “The economic impact of closing the racial wealth gap” by Nick Noel, Duwain Pinder, Shelley Stewart, and Jason Wright from McKinsey & Company: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-economic-impact-of-closing-the-racial-wealth-gap   “An Unjust Burden: The Disparate Treatment of Black Americans in the Criminal Justice System” by Elizabeth Hinton, LeShae Henderson, and Cindy Reed for Vera Institute of Justice: https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf   “Prosecutor-funded program helps kids do a 180, avoid charges” by Sami Edge from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/prosecutor-funded-community-effort-helps-kids-do-a-180-on-jail-bound-route/   King County Prosecuting Attorney - Choose 180 Youth Program: https://kingcounty.gov/depts/prosecutor/youth-programs/choose-180.aspx   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, I'm very excited to have joining us Sean Goode, the Executive Director of Choose 180, and Rebecca Thornton, who's the Office Manager and bookkeeper for Choose 180. Thank you so much for joining us today. [00:00:50] Sean Goode: It's an honor to be here, Crystal. Thanks for the invitation. [00:00:52] Rebecca Thornton: Thank you for having us. [00:00:55] Crystal Fincher: Excellent. So as we get started here, I just want to open up with you talking about what Choose 180 does and what brought you both into this work. And we can start with you, Sean. [00:01:09] Sean Goode: Yeah. Our organization exists to transform systems that cause harm, systems of injustice, and support the young people who've been impacted by those systems. And what that looks like is we partner intentionally with folks like prosecutors to co-create programming that exists outside of the traditional criminal legal system and alleviates the need for them to continue to prosecute young people. So in practicality, it's a young person lives in a neighborhood that's overly policed, their behavior's criminalized, the police send that referral to the prosecutor - but because of our relationship with them, they get community instead of a criminal conviction. And for the young people who engage in our traditional programming, over 90% of the time, they don't return to the criminal legal system within 12 months of participating in our programming. And so that's an example of one of our many models of service, but all of them have a genesis point of partnering with systems to transform the way they administer justice and supporting young people as an outcome to help alleviate the harm that those systems cause. My brother was incarcerated as a 13-year-old boy until he was a 21-year-old man and how he was stigmatized as a problem. And yet how, when he was released, saw me beginning to engage in some of those same problematic behaviors, but saw the possibility that lived within me and was able to call that out from a dark place and show me, by the way of his light, that there was something else that I could become. [00:02:30] Crystal Fincher: And what brought you to this work, Rebecca? [00:02:33] Rebecca Thornton: About six years ago, I was looking for just some way to donate my time, because I just felt I had survived so much and that was just a way I wanted to give back. And I stumbled upon what was the 180 Program at the time. And they were like, "Hey, do you want to come and share your story at one of our workshops?" And I agreed, and I just jumped right in, and I just kept coming back. And about maybe eight months in, Sean ended up coming on and I got to watch that whole process. And then the team started to grow. And then about two years ago now next month, I came on full time as the Office Manager and bookkeeper. And I stayed with Choose 180 because of my lived experience with drugs specifically. I hold this core belief that especially young people should not be criminalized for their behavior because so much of it comes from the things that have happened to them in their lives and the circumstances in which they lived, because that's what happened to me. And I just want to give back in that way so that people don't have to take as long to turn their life around like I did. [00:03:46] Crystal Fincher: You actually made news last year for something that we don't see often, and that was for deciding to make sure everyone at Choose 180 is making at least $70,000, who's there full-time, which is a huge part of a discussion that we're having just around paying people a living wage in the first place and making sure people who are around us that we work with can also afford to live within our communities. But also particularly in the nonprofit space, where, so often, we are used to hearing about thin budgets and even thinner salaries, and there's just not that much money to go around. And this is a pursuit that people get into, not for the money, but for serving the community. How did this conversation start within Choose 180? And how did you arrive at the place where you decided to say, "You know what, everyone deserves to have a fair wage and to have the ability to live where they're working."? [00:04:47] Sean Goode: Yeah. Thanks for that question, Crystal. I think I want to start by saying we're fortunate to serve in a community where there's organizations like Collective Justice, Creative Justice, and Freedom Project, who have all done work around wage equity. And some of them have started the organization out flat, or paying already close to or living wage. And so we're fortunate to be able to have examples like that ahead of us that make the journey that we're traveling easier. And fortunately, we had a couple of our team members speak up who were asking questions about, well, how does it work around here? How do we determine what people make? And how does one get a raise? And do we do things by merit? Do we do things by a degree? And what we didn't want to do is provide any one-off answer and fix one person's situation. We wanted to go about it in a way that addressed it holistically. We convened a committee from our board to assess our compensation philosophy, and they spent time interviewing our team members and listening to their voices. And then they brought their recommendations to me. And their recommendations were many. There were things like, how do we value lived experience? How do we value college degrees? How do we value time served at the organization? But a throughline that was consistent was living wage. And I heard the report, I looked at the report, and I said, "Yeah, that sounds good, but we're at a nonprofit and we're already paying above market rate in many of these positions. So I don't know what more people want from me." And I thought the conversation was done there. I thought, at that point, I was finished and we could move on, but then we had to build a budget out for the next year. And as the story goes, one of our team members was working on their budget and I told them to dream big. And if we need to add to staff, consider what that might look like, which is where I always start budgeting - to think big. And she came back to me and said, "Well, if we're thinking about adding staff, I can't do that and not have our teammates who are currently here making less than a living wage." And then it became a back-and-forth conversation where I still didn't really get what it was I was being asked to do. And at the end of that conversation, she said, "Look, we work to support young people and their families in escaping the material conditions they're living in that are contributing to the harm that they've experienced. Could it be that we're resourcing our team to live in those same material conditions?" And that cut deep. And so - [00:07:18] Crystal Fincher: That cut deep, didn't it? [00:07:20] Sean Goode: Yeah. Yeah. And then I went to Rebecca, because she was in the office that day, and I tugged on her and I said, "Rebecca, do you ever think about buying a home for Maddie?" And Rebecca, you can go ahead and talk about what that was like for you. [00:07:33] Rebecca Thornton: Well, I laughed at him. Maddie is my daughter - she's kind of the office kid, honestly. Everyone is just in love with her - she's eight. But Sean pulled me aside and he asked me if I was able to save money or if I had plans to ever buy a house, and I laughed at him. That was my first instinct because that's never been in my plans [00:07:54] Crystal Fincher: From your end, as you're following this process, Rebecca, a lot of times we hear about this as employers and people who hire people and determine how much people get paid - we frequently hear this conversation from their perspective. But for someone who's working in that condition and you are not dictating what your salary is, but you're living there, and as you said, it was laughable to you that thinking about saving for a house, or anything like that, was a possibility. What was this conversation like as someone working for the organization? [00:08:28] Rebecca Thornton: Well, I know a lot of my coworkers were of the stance of, "Yes, we deserve this. We're going to fight for this." And I was more of Sean's thinking. I'm just so used to making below a living wage that that's kind of all I knew and kind of a core belief of all I thought I deserved. So for this to be on the table, I didn't believe it. I was like, when it's in my bank account, then I might believe it. And it was also odd because here I am, a white person in a Black-led organization. Do I deserve to make that kind of money at the same time? I don't know. There's a lot of - it gets down to all the core beliefs I have in making sure that I know that I deserve that. And it comes - I didn't have a lot of education, and I'm working on my degree and things like that. It's just, it brought up a lot of emotions in me, honestly, more than I thought it would. And I'm glad I had stronger coworkers that could keep the faith in it for me because I don't know - I was a little more pessimistic about it, I feel. [00:09:52] Crystal Fincher: But I think you get to the root of something that a lot of people face - if they're just used to something and you think this is just how it is and there's not really a possibility for it to get any better, you just kind of accept the conditions and go along with the flow. To me, it seems like there's such a synergy between conversations and beliefs that you are bringing into the community, and this conversation that you had within your organization, which is something I feel a lot of organizations need to do. And there is a tension between what they're saying their values are, what they're saying they're working for in the community, and what they're perpetuating through their practices and their budgets. We talk publicly - budgets are moral documents. They're also moral documents within nonprofit organizations and businesses. So what got you to the point, Sean, where you were like, okay, this is something that we can make happen? And how did you work through that? [00:10:50] Sean Goode: Hearing from Rebecca and another one of our co-laborers here - just, it hurt because I care deeply for our team. And then I had this moment of realization, Crystal, where I recognized the only thing getting in the way of this happening is me. And there's also holding attention of this opportunity to build wealth and I know very well, as a multiracial Black man, that the wealth gap between Black Americans and white Americans is 95 cents to the dollar. So for every nickel that Black Americans hold, white Americans hold 95 cents. One of the principal ways to close the wealth gap in our nation is through home ownership. If I am an employer that's largely employing Black and Brown people and not paying them a rate that allows them to build wealth, then I'm perpetuating a historical harm on the very people who I believe are entitled to benefit from the same system that they've suffered from for 400 plus years. [00:11:58] Crystal Fincher: I think that is so important - appreciate you being transparent about the tensions. I think that a critical part of this conversation is acknowledging that those tensions exist, talking through how you work with it. And to your credit and to your team's credit, Rebecca, the willingness to say this is possible and, hey, we believe in better and we're going to stand in this belief while you catch up. And for you, Sean, we talk about empathy and compassion. Those things, to me, are only useful as verbs. And I believe to my core that that enables people to work more effectively, to carry the message more effectively, to intervene effectively, and those in the community to see, okay, you actually mean what you're saying. It's like a bridge to build trust. And so I do want to talk about this work. And so in that context, how do you start conversations with people who start out with that belief - "Hey, someone does the crime, they do the time. And looks like that fixes the problem to me." [00:13:01] Sean Goode: What I'd love to do is this - I'd love to start back and say, hey, let's talk about slave patrols. And then let's talk about abolition, which then led to vagrancy laws, which meant that Black folks could be criminalized for standing on street corners - being unemployed because they weren't employable because the white farmers, who were no longer enslaving them, wouldn't hire them unless they could be servants again - would then be arrested. And then when they are arrested, they would be leased out as convicts, which then put them back on the very same plantations that they were supposedly liberated from. I would love to be able to dive into the prison industrial complex and talk about how for-profit prisons have driven an industry and a practice towards incarcerating people. I would love to highlight the fact that there's more Black people incarcerated today than were ever enslaved at any point of time in our country. I would love to talk about the disproportionate policing and how policing is focused in impoverished areas that are highly under-resourced and undersupported and frequently neglected, where there's not access to quality education, quality healthcare, quality schools. I would love to talk about the many depravities that are present in the places where young people aren't allowed to have behavior listened to before it's criminalized. I would love to bring all those things to the forefront, but what I know to be true is most people who don't understand this reality, are too distant from that place that - for them, that seems like history and not present. And it's difficult for them to draw a throughline. Where I do believe we can start at is a simple conversation around cause and effect. If historically, policing behavior would lead to a decrease in behavior that causes harm, then we should be seeing, year over year, a decrease of the number of people who are incarcerated. We should be seeing a decrease in violent crime. We should be seeing a decrease in property crime. If these systems were preventative measures that were persuading people away from making these types of decisions, then after all these years, it should have had an impact that demonstrates that things are getting better in that regard. Everything we look at would tell us otherwise. Either it doesn't work, or humanity is so inherently evil that no matter how much we police behavior, it'll never change. I don't believe that humanity is so inherently evil. In the work we do, the majority of the folks that we're supporting are people who are committing - whose behavior's being criminalized because they're living in poverty. If someone steals from the Goodwill, it's not because they're some sort of malicious criminal. If somebody's stealing from Target, it's not because they're looking to make some sort of substantial come-up off of what it is that they've taken. So as a result, it's upon us to begin to think outside of our traditional pathways and lean in with the lens of empathy and grace, and understand that we can't police our way out of poverty. [00:16:13] Crystal Fincher: I couldn't agree more with every single thing that you just said. So with that conversation and people going, well, okay, yeah, we see that there were problems with what we've been doing, but I still don't see what the solution is. You're talking about all this compassion stuff, and you're talking about let's treat people better and not put them in prison. What is the answer that you have and the programs that you are working on that are okay, so what is that different thing? [00:16:41] Sean Goode: The work that we do and the work that we do in community with others creates an off-ramp from the criminal legal system and an on-ramp into community where both the young person who is accused of causing harm is invited to be on a healing journey of accountability, and the person who was harmed is also made whole and invited to be on a journey where they're healing. And we've had terrific impact because we center the humanity of those that we're serving - and not a humanity that's absent of being accountable to what you've done, but a humanity that doesn't limit the person to what it is they've done and creates a pathway to what it is they can do, and then provides them with the resources they need to fully lean into that possibility. [00:17:21] Crystal Fincher: Focusing on the stopgaps, what types of programs are there and how do they compare? Because a lot of people are still, I think, having challenges contextualizing - well, yeah, recidivism rates are high, but we see what happens when, okay, someone's arrested, they're sentenced, they go to prison, and then they come out. They see something happening and they're like, "Okay, that is something." It's not as visible to people yet - what the interventions are outside of the criminal legal system that are like, okay, this is the process of healing, this is the process of justice, this is how we work to prevent further harm from happening and also work on healing people who have been harmed - which, to your point, is usually everybody involved in the scenario. What do those look like? And what are those programs? What are those processes? [00:18:21] Sean Goode: Yeah. They look like eviction moratoriums, which keep people housed and not living on the street. They look like the County buying up hotels in places that are inconvenient for some homeowners, but necessary for those who can't afford to live in a home. They look like investing in mental health services at a statewide level, which is something that we failed to do for a very long time in Washington. They look like re-examining our tax code and considering more ways to be able to raise the resources necessary to meet the needs for the collective us, instead of prioritizing the needs for those of us that have already established the foundation of wealth. They look like initiatives like Best Starts for Kids in our region that allow organizations adjacent to ours and like ours to be able to stand up innovative programs that can serve as a stopgap to alleviate some of the hurt and harm that's been caused. They look like many things similar to what it is that I'm sharing. They look like - how do we make sure we get more farmers' markets and healthy foods into neighborhoods that haven't had access to them historically? How do we make sure that people who have access to those healthy foods have the time and space to prepare them because they're not on public transit hours a day going to and from work for a less-than-a-living-wage job and picking up their kids from childcare, and then finally getting home at an odd hour where it's cheaper to buy a Happy Meal than it is to make a meal? Right? These are all contributing factors to the spread of this disease of violence. So it's so multifaceted, but also, if you're wondering and you're listening to this - well, that sounds ambitious. That sounds huge. That sounds like a wonderful utopian society, but how do we deal with what it is we're dealing with today? I'd say, just imagine for a moment, close your eyes and - picture the suburbs - picture places where you can walk to the grocery store, like a gentrified Columbia City, picture places where you have access to green spaces and parks and healthy foods. I know it seems like it's abstract when we put it in the context of underserved neighborhoods, but in neighborhoods where people are paying $1.5 and $1.8 million for houses that were initially purchased for a couple hundred thousand dollars because they were dilapidated in squalor because the areas were underinvested for decades - if we just take a minute and imagine, how do we make sure people have equal access to those type of services, then we wouldn't be having a conversation about violence at all. We'd have a conversation around how do we make sure that there's equitable distribution of services, equitable access to quality healthcare and quality foods and quality education. This is not a profound innovation that we're talking about. It is a profound effort only in the context of the fact that we've historically neglected those that have suffered, hidden them away, and hope that they disappear, and as we all should eventually benefit from a system of capitalism. We are still here. We still persevere, but we could thrive if people saw our humanity and began to make sure we had living wages. I mean, this goes right back into the wage conversation that we began with. If organizations - I was reading a book about the economics in Black community and one of the things that it stood up was that the middle class of Black folks across the country is largely comprised of people who work in social services. So we are the ones who are serving those of us who are impacted, and simultaneously impacted because the majority of our jobs don't provide a living wage that allows us to build wealth to benefit from capitalism, to build up communities that aren't living in the conditions that are causing the harm that's leading to the crime that people are complaining about because they don't want that to be present in their neighborhood. And then where are we supposed to go? [00:22:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And absolutely valid and another - so many of those conversations about - as people explain the difference between Columbia City and an area that has been underinvested and under-resourced for so long - we can talk about Skyway, we can talk about a lot of different areas - it really comes down to the value that people place in those communities. To your point, about most Black people in the middle class being in the - basically serving and helping others, and that our value or people's value being tied up into their labor for others. And if you are laboring, then you have some value - not too much, but some, we'll recognize some. And if you don't, then we don't just value you. These are ultimately investment decisions based on value judgements of who deserves what and who deserves how much. And we repeatedly see and have a lot of empirical evidence about the judgements that our society has made about who is deemed worthy and who is deemed unworthy just for existing. And who has to do all of these shows of worthiness and value and labor to be considered worthy. And who just kind of gets that - because they exist. Now, kind of circling back around to Choose 180 - within Choose 180, you talked about earlier partnering with prosecutors, partnering within the system. Certainly, these are stopgaps and not the entire solution, but what do those partnerships, programs, interventions look like? [00:24:12] Sean Goode: Yeah. It begins with a genuine effort to connect with the people who are generally at the forefront of perpetuating harm, right? So the work with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office in King County goes back to 2011 when Dan Satterberg, now outgoing King County Prosecutor, was engaged with Doug Wheeler, community leader, and said, "Look, we're failing our Black and Brown children. Can you help me?" Right? And because Dan reached out to Doug - together, they created what at that time was called the 180 Program with other community leaders, and stood up an alternative that's continually alleviated the need for juvenile prosecution in our region. It begins with a willingness of those who are holding power to understand that their ability to hold power isn't going to transform the harm. It's their ability to release that power and give it back to those that put them in power, and allow them to co-create solutions that then serve the needs of those who have been impacted the most. And our existence is a manifestation of what is possible there, but it takes a lot of deconstructing of narratives. It takes a lot of trust building. It takes a lot of empathy and understanding, and it takes a lot of grace. Grace selectively applied is favoritism. And so what that means is we have to extend the same grace to prosecutors and law enforcement and court folks that we do to young people and families that we serve, because otherwise, we're just doing the same thing that law enforcement and court system and criminal legal system has done historically, which is prioritize people that they're preferential to while neglecting those that they don't care for. [00:26:00] Crystal Fincher: As the community is looking at programs that are happening through Choose 180 and the diversions that you're doing, as you're working with people to help connect them to resources, to coach them in better ways, provide better examples, and make sure they have the tools and support to sustain a different direction permanently, you talked about your success with recidivism rates. In terms of people sitting back - okay, things are broken, okay, totally not ideal. All right. Great. You have these programs. All right. How are they working in comparison to the traditional system? How do we know what you are talking about is working any better? [00:26:49] Sean Goode: Yeah. Well, Crystal, what I'm asking the community to do is give us the same runway that we've given the systems that have historically caused harm. Give us the same runway that we give the systems that historically cause harm. If we're only - we've been in practice for 10 years and have had great impact. Our systems of oppression have been in place for hundreds of years and have caused a ton of negative impact. How much of a runway do we get to prove that we can be successful? Do we get a year? Do we get two years? Do we get three years? Do we get four years maybe to stand something up for it to be proven wrong? How many iterations do we get to come up with, right? Are we allowed to have as many moments of reform - calls for reform - as law enforcement has in our nation. Historically year over year, do we get that same grace? That's what I'm asking for. If you want to stand up an alternative that's going to help deconstruct years upon years of perpetuated harm, then it's going to take more than 24 to 36 months to do that. It's going to take more than 10 years. It's going to take a generation of commitments to innovative ideas that we don't run away with the first time that they don't have the impact that we're looking for, because candidly, Crystal, if we ran away from the criminal legal system every time someone was released to the community and caused harm again, then we wouldn't be using it today at all. We wouldn't be resourcing it today at all, but we do because we believe that that can be fixed and it can be made better. Well, I'm asking folks to carry that same conviction in the community-based alternatives that are being stood up by the people who are closest to the pain points. Just like when it came to our wage conversation as an organization, the folks who are closest to the pain point understood what they needed to be healthy and whole. In community, the people who are closest to the pain point know what they need to experience safety in their community. Why don't we begin to just stand up what it is that folks are asking for and see what happens, and give it a runway like we've given to these other antiquated systems? [00:28:48] Crystal Fincher: I feel like that is a big thing that we're running into today - that we are sure we haven't had the best results, but we can change, we can fix it. While at the same time, demanding that community-based alternatives - one, present all the data that we need to see that this will fix all of the problems in order for us to consider investing in you at one-tenth of a percent that we invest in the rest of our criminal legal injustice system. Within there - certainly, goodness, you give it a 50- or 60-year runway, the change that you could see, it's hard for me to envision that change. Because if you just look on the short term, better results when it comes to reoffense and recidivism at the 12-month mark and other month marks - immediate results that are, sure, not perfect, but certainly better than the existing traditional systems. What would you say makes you most optimistic about the work that you're doing? And with this, I would just say also, Rebecca, in this question, what makes you most optimistic about the work that you're doing and the changes that you're seeing throughout the programs that you have, and the people who you're working with in the community? [00:30:16] Rebecca Thornton: Well, for me, I'm so excited that it's being talked about because it's something that I've always believed in, and I just never believed it was possible. Coming to Choose 180 and starting working full-time and being totally enmeshed into the programs and the people, I've started to look at things differently and looking at ideas differently. Things are possible if you can come together as a group and work for it and have that belief in it. You can make things happen. I've never seen that before. But I come from corporate America - there's no room for that there as well. It's been so cool to see - and that can be applied out in the community as well. If people can come together and they have the will - and like Sean said, the stamina - they can make stuff happen. But they need the tools to be able to do that as well, because I was out in the community on drugs years ago. I had no idea that change could happen for anyone. And I just think of how differently my life would've been had I had access to the things that could be possible in the 50 years that Sean is talking about. Or the things that my daughter's going to be able to have access to is just so important. My daughter - we have what's like "a broken home." There's statistics and stigma in that, right? So I've worked very hard to make sure that she sees me work hard and surround her with good people and all of that. But at the same time, there's still things in the way there. There's still stigma, right? And I just want to make sure that she knows that anything is possible. And I feel like what we're doing at Choose 180 just shows that, and it's pretty powerful. [00:32:15] Crystal Fincher: And what makes you most optimistic when you look at the work you're doing and the impact that you're having, Sean? [00:32:23] Sean Goode: I think about - brief history lesson here for some folks who might be listening. In the 1700s in Boston, there was a smallpox outbreak and there's an enslaved African American man who had established - there was a tribal cure for smallpox, a practice. And he introduced it to his enslaver, but for five years, the people of Boston refused to listen to this cure for smallpox because it was coming from an enslaved African American, from a tribal custom, because they felt like it couldn't possibly be an answer that would come from an enslaved person. It couldn't possibly be an answer. We need the richness of our white dominant medical science to be able to solve for this. And hundreds of Bostonians died because of their failure to listen to this enslaved African American man. I find hope that as a country, over the past 300 years, that we may have evolved past the point of ignoring those who are bringing solutions from nontraditional spaces, and that we may now be at a position, 300 years later, to lean in and say, "Well, if you think you have the cure, let's go ahead and give it a shot, because quite possibly your way could save lives." [00:33:59] Crystal Fincher: Amen. So I just thank you both for coming on this show, for sharing your experience and your journey and your wisdom, and just encourage people to continue to pay attention to Choose 180, get involved, support. And certainly at a neighborhood and community level, you can do these things where you're at, and that's actually the most powerful place you can activate and get involved. So please make sure that we don't just talk about Choose 180 and other organizations in the abstract, and this is what someone is doing over there, and this is what's possible over there. It is possible everywhere and exactly where you are. And help to be part of what makes that happen. Turn what's possible into what's happening. So with that, I just thank you once again for being here, and hope the listeners have a wonderful day. I thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistance from Shannon Cheng. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcast - just type "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. We'll talk to you next time.

Sean Goode and Rebecca Thornton from Choose 180 stop by to share how to transform systems of harm and injustice - by supporting young people impacted by them as well as their own staff in doing this work. They discuss a better world where neighborhoods are resourced, generative programs are co-created, and the humanity of those accused of causing harm is centered alongside the healing of those who are harmed. Such a world is not as far off as one may think, but does require the transfer of power to those closest to the pain and a long-enough runway to have lasting effects. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal, on Twitter at @finchfrii, find Sean at @GraceNotGuilt, and Choose 180 at @ICHOOSE180   Resources Choose 180: https://choose180.org/   “A King County nonprofit raised all staff salaries to $70,000 minimum. Will more organizations follow?” by Naomi Ishisaka from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/labor-shortage-or-living-wage-shortage-one-king-county-nonprofit-is-taking-a-different-approach/   "Disparities in Wealth by Race and Ethnicity in the 2019 Survey of Consumer Finances" by Neil Bhutta, Andrew C. Chang, Lisa J. Dettling, and Joanne W. Hsu for FEDS Notes: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/disparities-in-wealth-by-race-and-ethnicity-in-the-2019-survey-of-consumer-finances-20200928.htm   “Closing the racial wealth gap requires heavy, progressive taxation of wealth” by Vanessa Williamson from The Brookings Institution: https://www.brookings.edu/research/closing-the-racial-wealth-gap-requires-heavy-progressive-taxation-of-wealth/   “The economic impact of closing the racial wealth gap” by Nick Noel, Duwain Pinder, Shelley Stewart, and Jason Wright from McKinsey & Company: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/the-economic-impact-of-closing-the-racial-wealth-gap   “An Unjust Burden: The Disparate Treatment of Black Americans in the Criminal Justice System” by Elizabeth Hinton, LeShae Henderson, and Cindy Reed for Vera Institute of Justice: https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf   “Prosecutor-funded program helps kids do a 180, avoid charges” by Sami Edge from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/prosecutor-funded-community-effort-helps-kids-do-a-180-on-jail-bound-route/   King County Prosecuting Attorney - Choose 180 Youth Program: https://kingcounty.gov/depts/prosecutor/youth-programs/choose-180.aspx   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, I'm very excited to have joining us Sean Goode, the Executive Director of Choose 180, and Rebecca Thornton, who's the Office Manager and bookkeeper for Choose 180. Thank you so much for joining us today. [00:00:50] Sean Goode: It's an honor to be here, Crystal. Thanks for the invitation. [00:00:52] Rebecca Thornton: Thank you for having us. [00:00:55] Crystal Fincher: Excellent. So as we get started here, I just want to open up with you talking about what Choose 180 does and what brought you both into this work. And we can start with you, Sean. [00:01:09] Sean Goode: Yeah. Our organization exists to transform systems that cause harm, systems of injustice, and support the young people who've been impacted by those systems. And what that looks like is we partner intentionally with folks like prosecutors to co-create programming that exists outside of the traditional criminal legal system and alleviates the need for them to continue to prosecute young people. So in practicality, it's a young person lives in a neighborhood that's overly policed, their behavior's criminalized, the police send that referral to the prosecutor - but because of our relationship with them, they get community instead of a criminal conviction. And for the young people who engage in our traditional programming, over 90% of the time, they don't return to the criminal legal system within 12 months of participating in our programming. And so that's an example of one of our many models of service, but all of them have a genesis point of partnering with systems to transform the way they administer justice and supporting young people as an outcome to help alleviate the harm that those systems cause. My brother was incarcerated as a 13-year-old boy until he was a 21-year-old man and how he was stigmatized as a problem. And yet how, when he was released, saw me beginning to engage in some of those same problematic behaviors, but saw the possibility that lived within me and was able to call that out from a dark place and show me, by the way of his light, that there was something else that I could become. [00:02:30] Crystal Fincher: And what brought you to this work, Rebecca? [00:02:33] Rebecca Thornton: About six years ago, I was looking for just some way to donate my time, because I just felt I had survived so much and that was just a way I wanted to give back. And I stumbled upon what was the 180 Program at the time. And they were like, "Hey, do you want to come and share your story at one of our workshops?" And I agreed, and I just jumped right in, and I just kept coming back. And about maybe eight months in, Sean ended up coming on and I got to watch that whole process. And then the team started to grow. And then about two years ago now next month, I came on full time as the Office Manager and bookkeeper. And I stayed with Choose 180 because of my lived experience with drugs specifically. I hold this core belief that especially young people should not be criminalized for their behavior because so much of it comes from the things that have happened to them in their lives and the circumstances in which they lived, because that's what happened to me. And I just want to give back in that way so that people don't have to take as long to turn their life around like I did. [00:03:46] Crystal Fincher: You actually made news last year for something that we don't see often, and that was for deciding to make sure everyone at Choose 180 is making at least $70,000, who's there full-time, which is a huge part of a discussion that we're having just around paying people a living wage in the first place and making sure people who are around us that we work with can also afford to live within our communities. But also particularly in the nonprofit space, where, so often, we are used to hearing about thin budgets and even thinner salaries, and there's just not that much money to go around. And this is a pursuit that people get into, not for the money, but for serving the community. How did this conversation start within Choose 180? And how did you arrive at the place where you decided to say, "You know what, everyone deserves to have a fair wage and to have the ability to live where they're working."? [00:04:47] Sean Goode: Yeah. Thanks for that question, Crystal. I think I want to start by saying we're fortunate to serve in a community where there's organizations like Collective Justice, Creative Justice, and Freedom Project, who have all done work around wage equity. And some of them have started the organization out flat, or paying already close to or living wage. And so we're fortunate to be able to have examples like that ahead of us that make the journey that we're traveling easier. And fortunately, we had a couple of our team members speak up who were asking questions about, well, how does it work around here? How do we determine what people make? And how does one get a raise? And do we do things by merit? Do we do things by a degree? And what we didn't want to do is provide any one-off answer and fix one person's situation. We wanted to go about it in a way that addressed it holistically. We convened a committee from our board to assess our compensation philosophy, and they spent time interviewing our team members and listening to their voices. And then they brought their recommendations to me. And their recommendations were many. There were things like, how do we value lived experience? How do we value college degrees? How do we value time served at the organization? But a throughline that was consistent was living wage. And I heard the report, I looked at the report, and I said, "Yeah, that sounds good, but we're at a nonprofit and we're already paying above market rate in many of these positions. So I don't know what more people want from me." And I thought the conversation was done there. I thought, at that point, I was finished and we could move on, but then we had to build a budget out for the next year. And as the story goes, one of our team members was working on their budget and I told them to dream big. And if we need to add to staff, consider what that might look like, which is where I always start budgeting - to think big. And she came back to me and said, "Well, if we're thinking about adding staff, I can't do that and not have our teammates who are currently here making less than a living wage." And then it became a back-and-forth conversation where I still didn't really get what it was I was being asked to do. And at the end of that conversation, she said, "Look, we work to support young people and their families in escaping the material conditions they're living in that are contributing to the harm that they've experienced. Could it be that we're resourcing our team to live in those same material conditions?" And that cut deep. And so - [00:07:18] Crystal Fincher: That cut deep, didn't it? [00:07:20] Sean Goode: Yeah. Yeah. And then I went to Rebecca, because she was in the office that day, and I tugged on her and I said, "Rebecca, do you ever think about buying a home for Maddie?" And Rebecca, you can go ahead and talk about what that was like for you. [00:07:33] Rebecca Thornton: Well, I laughed at him. Maddie is my daughter - she's kind of the office kid, honestly. Everyone is just in love with her - she's eight. But Sean pulled me aside and he asked me if I was able to save money or if I had plans to ever buy a house, and I laughed at him. That was my first instinct because that's never been in my plans [00:07:54] Crystal Fincher: From your end, as you're following this process, Rebecca, a lot of times we hear about this as employers and people who hire people and determine how much people get paid - we frequently hear this conversation from their perspective. But for someone who's working in that condition and you are not dictating what your salary is, but you're living there, and as you said, it was laughable to you that thinking about saving for a house, or anything like that, was a possibility. What was this conversation like as someone working for the organization? [00:08:28] Rebecca Thornton: Well, I know a lot of my coworkers were of the stance of, "Yes, we deserve this. We're going to fight for this." And I was more of Sean's thinking. I'm just so used to making below a living wage that that's kind of all I knew and kind of a core belief of all I thought I deserved. So for this to be on the table, I didn't believe it. I was like, when it's in my bank account, then I might believe it. And it was also odd because here I am, a white person in a Black-led organization. Do I deserve to make that kind of money at the same time? I don't know. There's a lot of - it gets down to all the core beliefs I have in making sure that I know that I deserve that. And it comes - I didn't have a lot of education, and I'm working on my degree and things like that. It's just, it brought up a lot of emotions in me, honestly, more than I thought it would. And I'm glad I had stronger coworkers that could keep the faith in it for me because I don't know - I was a little more pessimistic about it, I feel. [00:09:52] Crystal Fincher: But I think you get to the root of something that a lot of people face - if they're just used to something and you think this is just how it is and there's not really a possibility for it to get any better, you just kind of accept the conditions and go along with the flow. To me, it seems like there's such a synergy between conversations and beliefs that you are bringing into the community, and this conversation that you had within your organization, which is something I feel a lot of organizations need to do. And there is a tension between what they're saying their values are, what they're saying they're working for in the community, and what they're perpetuating through their practices and their budgets. We talk publicly - budgets are moral documents. They're also moral documents within nonprofit organizations and businesses. So what got you to the point, Sean, where you were like, okay, this is something that we can make happen? And how did you work through that? [00:10:50] Sean Goode: Hearing from Rebecca and another one of our co-laborers here - just, it hurt because I care deeply for our team. And then I had this moment of realization, Crystal, where I recognized the only thing getting in the way of this happening is me. And there's also holding attention of this opportunity to build wealth and I know very well, as a multiracial Black man, that the wealth gap between Black Americans and white Americans is 95 cents to the dollar. So for every nickel that Black Americans hold, white Americans hold 95 cents. One of the principal ways to close the wealth gap in our nation is through home ownership. If I am an employer that's largely employing Black and Brown people and not paying them a rate that allows them to build wealth, then I'm perpetuating a historical harm on the very people who I believe are entitled to benefit from the same system that they've suffered from for 400 plus years. [00:11:58] Crystal Fincher: I think that is so important - appreciate you being transparent about the tensions. I think that a critical part of this conversation is acknowledging that those tensions exist, talking through how you work with it. And to your credit and to your team's credit, Rebecca, the willingness to say this is possible and, hey, we believe in better and we're going to stand in this belief while you catch up. And for you, Sean, we talk about empathy and compassion. Those things, to me, are only useful as verbs. And I believe to my core that that enables people to work more effectively, to carry the message more effectively, to intervene effectively, and those in the community to see, okay, you actually mean what you're saying. It's like a bridge to build trust. And so I do want to talk about this work. And so in that context, how do you start conversations with people who start out with that belief - "Hey, someone does the crime, they do the time. And looks like that fixes the problem to me." [00:13:01] Sean Goode: What I'd love to do is this - I'd love to start back and say, hey, let's talk about slave patrols. And then let's talk about abolition, which then led to vagrancy laws, which meant that Black folks could be criminalized for standing on street corners - being unemployed because they weren't employable because the white farmers, who were no longer enslaving them, wouldn't hire them unless they could be servants again - would then be arrested. And then when they are arrested, they would be leased out as convicts, which then put them back on the very same plantations that they were supposedly liberated from. I would love to be able to dive into the prison industrial complex and talk about how for-profit prisons have driven an industry and a practice towards incarcerating people. I would love to highlight the fact that there's more Black people incarcerated today than were ever enslaved at any point of time in our country. I would love to talk about the disproportionate policing and how policing is focused in impoverished areas that are highly under-resourced and undersupported and frequently neglected, where there's not access to quality education, quality healthcare, quality schools. I would love to talk about the many depravities that are present in the places where young people aren't allowed to have behavior listened to before it's criminalized. I would love to bring all those things to the forefront, but what I know to be true is most people who don't understand this reality, are too distant from that place that - for them, that seems like history and not present. And it's difficult for them to draw a throughline. Where I do believe we can start at is a simple conversation around cause and effect. If historically, policing behavior would lead to a decrease in behavior that causes harm, then we should be seeing, year over year, a decrease of the number of people who are incarcerated. We should be seeing a decrease in violent crime. We should be seeing a decrease in property crime. If these systems were preventative measures that were persuading people away from making these types of decisions, then after all these years, it should have had an impact that demonstrates that things are getting better in that regard. Everything we look at would tell us otherwise. Either it doesn't work, or humanity is so inherently evil that no matter how much we police behavior, it'll never change. I don't believe that humanity is so inherently evil. In the work we do, the majority of the folks that we're supporting are people who are committing - whose behavior's being criminalized because they're living in poverty. If someone steals from the Goodwill, it's not because they're some sort of malicious criminal. If somebody's stealing from Target, it's not because they're looking to make some sort of substantial come-up off of what it is that they've taken. So as a result, it's upon us to begin to think outside of our traditional pathways and lean in with the lens of empathy and grace, and understand that we can't police our way out of poverty. [00:16:13] Crystal Fincher: I couldn't agree more with every single thing that you just said. So with that conversation and people going, well, okay, yeah, we see that there were problems with what we've been doing, but I still don't see what the solution is. You're talking about all this compassion stuff, and you're talking about let's treat people better and not put them in prison. What is the answer that you have and the programs that you are working on that are okay, so what is that different thing? [00:16:41] Sean Goode: The work that we do and the work that we do in community with others creates an off-ramp from the criminal legal system and an on-ramp into community where both the young person who is accused of causing harm is invited to be on a healing journey of accountability, and the person who was harmed is also made whole and invited to be on a journey where they're healing. And we've had terrific impact because we center the humanity of those that we're serving - and not a humanity that's absent of being accountable to what you've done, but a humanity that doesn't limit the person to what it is they've done and creates a pathway to what it is they can do, and then provides them with the resources they need to fully lean into that possibility. [00:17:21] Crystal Fincher: Focusing on the stopgaps, what types of programs are there and how do they compare? Because a lot of people are still, I think, having challenges contextualizing - well, yeah, recidivism rates are high, but we see what happens when, okay, someone's arrested, they're sentenced, they go to prison, and then they come out. They see something happening and they're like, "Okay, that is something." It's not as visible to people yet - what the interventions are outside of the criminal legal system that are like, okay, this is the process of healing, this is the process of justice, this is how we work to prevent further harm from happening and also work on healing people who have been harmed - which, to your point, is usually everybody involved in the scenario. What do those look like? And what are those programs? What are those processes? [00:18:21] Sean Goode: Yeah. They look like eviction moratoriums, which keep people housed and not living on the street. They look like the County buying up hotels in places that are inconvenient for some homeowners, but necessary for those who can't afford to live in a home. They look like investing in mental health services at a statewide level, which is something that we failed to do for a very long time in Washington. They look like re-examining our tax code and considering more ways to be able to raise the resources necessary to meet the needs for the collective us, instead of prioritizing the needs for those of us that have already established the foundation of wealth. They look like initiatives like Best Starts for Kids in our region that allow organizations adjacent to ours and like ours to be able to stand up innovative programs that can serve as a stopgap to alleviate some of the hurt and harm that's been caused. They look like many things similar to what it is that I'm sharing. They look like - how do we make sure we get more farmers' markets and healthy foods into neighborhoods that haven't had access to them historically? How do we make sure that people who have access to those healthy foods have the time and space to prepare them because they're not on public transit hours a day going to and from work for a less-than-a-living-wage job and picking up their kids from childcare, and then finally getting home at an odd hour where it's cheaper to buy a Happy Meal than it is to make a meal? Right? These are all contributing factors to the spread of this disease of violence. So it's so multifaceted, but also, if you're wondering and you're listening to this - well, that sounds ambitious. That sounds huge. That sounds like a wonderful utopian society, but how do we deal with what it is we're dealing with today? I'd say, just imagine for a moment, close your eyes and - picture the suburbs - picture places where you can walk to the grocery store, like a gentrified Columbia City, picture places where you have access to green spaces and parks and healthy foods. I know it seems like it's abstract when we put it in the context of underserved neighborhoods, but in neighborhoods where people are paying $1.5 and $1.8 million for houses that were initially purchased for a couple hundred thousand dollars because they were dilapidated in squalor because the areas were underinvested for decades - if we just take a minute and imagine, how do we make sure people have equal access to those type of services, then we wouldn't be having a conversation about violence at all. We'd have a conversation around how do we make sure that there's equitable distribution of services, equitable access to quality healthcare and quality foods and quality education. This is not a profound innovation that we're talking about. It is a profound effort only in the context of the fact that we've historically neglected those that have suffered, hidden them away, and hope that they disappear, and as we all should eventually benefit from a system of capitalism. We are still here. We still persevere, but we could thrive if people saw our humanity and began to make sure we had living wages. I mean, this goes right back into the wage conversation that we began with. If organizations - I was reading a book about the economics in Black community and one of the things that it stood up was that the middle class of Black folks across the country is largely comprised of people who work in social services. So we are the ones who are serving those of us who are impacted, and simultaneously impacted because the majority of our jobs don't provide a living wage that allows us to build wealth to benefit from capitalism, to build up communities that aren't living in the conditions that are causing the harm that's leading to the crime that people are complaining about because they don't want that to be present in their neighborhood. And then where are we supposed to go? [00:22:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And absolutely valid and another - so many of those conversations about - as people explain the difference between Columbia City and an area that has been underinvested and under-resourced for so long - we can talk about Skyway, we can talk about a lot of different areas - it really comes down to the value that people place in those communities. To your point, about most Black people in the middle class being in the - basically serving and helping others, and that our value or people's value being tied up into their labor for others. And if you are laboring, then you have some value - not too much, but some, we'll recognize some. And if you don't, then we don't just value you. These are ultimately investment decisions based on value judgements of who deserves what and who deserves how much. And we repeatedly see and have a lot of empirical evidence about the judgements that our society has made about who is deemed worthy and who is deemed unworthy just for existing. And who has to do all of these shows of worthiness and value and labor to be considered worthy. And who just kind of gets that - because they exist. Now, kind of circling back around to Choose 180 - within Choose 180, you talked about earlier partnering with prosecutors, partnering within the system. Certainly, these are stopgaps and not the entire solution, but what do those partnerships, programs, interventions look like? [00:24:12] Sean Goode: Yeah. It begins with a genuine effort to connect with the people who are generally at the forefront of perpetuating harm, right? So the work with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office in King County goes back to 2011 when Dan Satterberg, now outgoing King County Prosecutor, was engaged with Doug Wheeler, community leader, and said, "Look, we're failing our Black and Brown children. Can you help me?" Right? And because Dan reached out to Doug - together, they created what at that time was called the 180 Program with other community leaders, and stood up an alternative that's continually alleviated the need for juvenile prosecution in our region. It begins with a willingness of those who are holding power to understand that their ability to hold power isn't going to transform the harm. It's their ability to release that power and give it back to those that put them in power, and allow them to co-create solutions that then serve the needs of those who have been impacted the most. And our existence is a manifestation of what is possible there, but it takes a lot of deconstructing of narratives. It takes a lot of trust building. It takes a lot of empathy and understanding, and it takes a lot of grace. Grace selectively applied is favoritism. And so what that means is we have to extend the same grace to prosecutors and law enforcement and court folks that we do to young people and families that we serve, because otherwise, we're just doing the same thing that law enforcement and court system and criminal legal system has done historically, which is prioritize people that they're preferential to while neglecting those that they don't care for. [00:26:00] Crystal Fincher: As the community is looking at programs that are happening through Choose 180 and the diversions that you're doing, as you're working with people to help connect them to resources, to coach them in better ways, provide better examples, and make sure they have the tools and support to sustain a different direction permanently, you talked about your success with recidivism rates. In terms of people sitting back - okay, things are broken, okay, totally not ideal. All right. Great. You have these programs. All right. How are they working in comparison to the traditional system? How do we know what you are talking about is working any better? [00:26:49] Sean Goode: Yeah. Well, Crystal, what I'm asking the community to do is give us the same runway that we've given the systems that have historically caused harm. Give us the same runway that we give the systems that historically cause harm. If we're only - we've been in practice for 10 years and have had great impact. Our systems of oppression have been in place for hundreds of years and have caused a ton of negative impact. How much of a runway do we get to prove that we can be successful? Do we get a year? Do we get two years? Do we get three years? Do we get four years maybe to stand something up for it to be proven wrong? How many iterations do we get to come up with, right? Are we allowed to have as many moments of reform - calls for reform - as law enforcement has in our nation. Historically year over year, do we get that same grace? That's what I'm asking for. If you want to stand up an alternative that's going to help deconstruct years upon years of perpetuated harm, then it's going to take more than 24 to 36 months to do that. It's going to take more than 10 years. It's going to take a generation of commitments to innovative ideas that we don't run away with the first time that they don't have the impact that we're looking for, because candidly, Crystal, if we ran away from the criminal legal system every time someone was released to the community and caused harm again, then we wouldn't be using it today at all. We wouldn't be resourcing it today at all, but we do because we believe that that can be fixed and it can be made better. Well, I'm asking folks to carry that same conviction in the community-based alternatives that are being stood up by the people who are closest to the pain points. Just like when it came to our wage conversation as an organization, the folks who are closest to the pain point understood what they needed to be healthy and whole. In community, the people who are closest to the pain point know what they need to experience safety in their community. Why don't we begin to just stand up what it is that folks are asking for and see what happens, and give it a runway like we've given to these other antiquated systems? [00:28:48] Crystal Fincher: I feel like that is a big thing that we're running into today - that we are sure we haven't had the best results, but we can change, we can fix it. While at the same time, demanding that community-based alternatives - one, present all the data that we need to see that this will fix all of the problems in order for us to consider investing in you at one-tenth of a percent that we invest in the rest of our criminal legal injustice system. Within there - certainly, goodness, you give it a 50- or 60-year runway, the change that you could see, it's hard for me to envision that change. Because if you just look on the short term, better results when it comes to reoffense and recidivism at the 12-month mark and other month marks - immediate results that are, sure, not perfect, but certainly better than the existing traditional systems. What would you say makes you most optimistic about the work that you're doing? And with this, I would just say also, Rebecca, in this question, what makes you most optimistic about the work that you're doing and the changes that you're seeing throughout the programs that you have, and the people who you're working with in the community? [00:30:16] Rebecca Thornton: Well, for me, I'm so excited that it's being talked about because it's something that I've always believed in, and I just never believed it was possible. Coming to Choose 180 and starting working full-time and being totally enmeshed into the programs and the people, I've started to look at things differently and looking at ideas differently. Things are possible if you can come together as a group and work for it and have that belief in it. You can make things happen. I've never seen that before. But I come from corporate America - there's no room for that there as well. It's been so cool to see - and that can be applied out in the community as well. If people can come together and they have the will - and like Sean said, the stamina - they can make stuff happen. But they need the tools to be able to do that as well, because I was out in the community on drugs years ago. I had no idea that change could happen for anyone. And I just think of how differently my life would've been had I had access to the things that could be possible in the 50 years that Sean is talking about. Or the things that my daughter's going to be able to have access to is just so important. My daughter - we have what's like "a broken home." There's statistics and stigma in that, right? So I've worked very hard to make sure that she sees me work hard and surround her with good people and all of that. But at the same time, there's still things in the way there. There's still stigma, right? And I just want to make sure that she knows that anything is possible. And I feel like what we're doing at Choose 180 just shows that, and it's pretty powerful. [00:32:15] Crystal Fincher: And what makes you most optimistic when you look at the work you're doing and the impact that you're having, Sean? [00:32:23] Sean Goode: I think about - brief history lesson here for some folks who might be listening. In the 1700s in Boston, there was a smallpox outbreak and there's an enslaved African American man who had established - there was a tribal cure for smallpox, a practice. And he introduced it to his enslaver, but for five years, the people of Boston refused to listen to this cure for smallpox because it was coming from an enslaved African American, from a tribal custom, because they felt like it couldn't possibly be an answer that would come from an enslaved person. It couldn't possibly be an answer. We need the richness of our white dominant medical science to be able to solve for this. And hundreds of Bostonians died because of their failure to listen to this enslaved African American man. I find hope that as a country, over the past 300 years, that we may have evolved past the point of ignoring those who are bringing solutions from nontraditional spaces, and that we may now be at a position, 300 years later, to lean in and say, "Well, if you think you have the cure, let's go ahead and give it a shot, because quite possibly your way could save lives." [00:33:59] Crystal Fincher: Amen. So I just thank you both for coming on this show, for sharing your experience and your journey and your wisdom, and just encourage people to continue to pay attention to Choose 180, get involved, support. And certainly at a neighborhood and community level, you can do these things where you're at, and that's actually the most powerful place you can activate and get involved. So please make sure that we don't just talk about Choose 180 and other organizations in the abstract, and this is what someone is doing over there, and this is what's possible over there. It is possible everywhere and exactly where you are. And help to be part of what makes that happen. Turn what's possible into what's happening. So with that, I just thank you once again for being here, and hope the listeners have a wonderful day. I thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistance from Shannon Cheng. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcast - just type "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in. We'll talk to you next time.

This week on the Bobcast, we're recapping the NESCAC Championships for both cross country teams! Plus, we preview the swimming and diving season with head coach Peter Casares and associate head coach Vanessa Williamson '05. All that and more... Interviews this episode: 1:08 -- Ed Argast, Interim Head Coach, Football. 5:43 -- Carly Harris '22, Women's Cross Country (Female Bobcat of the Week). 12:06 -- Sam Kartsonis '24, Men's Cross Country (Male Bobcat of the Week). 22:11 -- Peter Casares and Vanessa Williamson '05, Head Coach and Associate Head Coach, Swimming and Diving.

How does an online community, dominated by privileged parents, discuss its local school system? In a new report titled “We all want what’s best for our kids: Discussions of D.C. public school options in an online forum,” Brookings researchers examined thousands of messages on the D.C. Urban Moms school discussion forum to find out what they were talking about and how their conversations reflect continued racial segregation in the public schools of the nation’s capital. The report is co-authored by Vanessa Williamson, Jackson Gode, and Hao Sun. Williamson, a senior fellow in Governance Studies at Brookings, joins the Cafeteria to discuss the report. Subscribe to Brookings podcasts here or on iTunes, send feedback email to BCP@Brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at @policypodcasts on Twitter. The Brookings Cafeteria is part of the Brookings Podcast Network.

Behind the News, 1/21/21 - guests: Réka Juhász on precedents for WFH; Vanessa Williamson on Confederate roots of "taxpayer" discourse - Doug Henwood

Sam hosts Vanessa Williamson (@V_Williamson), a Brookings Institute fellow, to discuss her recent piece in Dissent Magazine, "The Austerity Politics of White Supremacy," on how the cult of the "taxpayer" functions as an effective veneer to push through racist attacks on democracy. On today's show: Cori Bush says House should impeach Trump, a white supremacist president, GOP boos her. House GOP member says Trump and his supporters aren't racist.... they're just afraid of immigrants crossing the border and not being able to say offensive things! Sam hosts Vanessa Williamson (@V_Williamson), a Brookings Institute fellow, to discuss her recent piece in Dissent Magazine, "The Austerity Politics of White Supremacy," on how the cult of the "taxpayer" functions as an effective veneer to push through racist attacks on democracy. In the days of Reconstruction, the Southern planter class found it difficult to get poor whites on their side without appealing to their material interests. By re-framing policy in terms of taxes, they got tax-burdened whites on board with a project of austerity which continues to this day. On the fun half: Poll: QAnon favorability is highest among young people. Marjorie Taylor Greene unveils plan to impeach Joe Biden. QAnon Shaman describes how the cops let him leave the capitol. Trumpers yell at Rep Correa in airport. A plug for National Educators United (nationaleducatorsunited.org). Protestor before capitol building yelling "we were invited!" After Trump is impeached in the House, Mike Huckabee describes it as a lynching. NY AG Tish James talks about lawsuit against NYPD. Tucker says Democrats are a solitary group with "shared genetics" founded in the exclusion of straight white men. Plus, your calls and IMs! Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com Check out the Brand New Majority Report Merch Shop! https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ (Merch issues and concerns can be addressed here: majorityreportstore@mirrorimage.com) The AM Quickie is now on YouTube Subscribe to the AM Quickie at https://fans.fm/amquickie Make the AMQ part of your Alexa Flash Briefing too! You can now watch the livestream on Twitch Check out today's sponsors: BetterHelp gives you access to your own fully licensed and accredited therapist via phone, chat, or video. A lot of therapists elsewhere have long waitlists and it can take weeks or months before they can see you… But when you sign up with BetterHelp, they match you with a therapist based on your specific needs, and you’ll be communicating with them in less than 24 hours. BetterHelp is giving our audience 10% off their first month when you go to https://betterhelp.com/majorityreport Tushy: Hello Tushy cleans your butt with a precise stream of fresh water for just $79. It attaches to your existing toilet – requires NO electricity or additional plumbing – and cuts toilet paper use by 80% – so the Hello Tushy 3.0 bidet pays for itself in a few months. Go to hellotushy.com/majority to get 10% off today! PlushCare provides primary and urgent healthcare through virtual appointments. If you’re feeling anxious, depressed or stressed about what’s going on in the world, PlushCare doctors are here to help by discussing treatment options and providing prescriptions as needed. With a PlushCare membership, you can see a doctor from the comfort of home; get diagnosed, treated and even have a prescription sent to your local pharmacy within minutes. Go to PlushCare.com/majority to start your FREE 30-day trial. Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Subscribe to AM Quickie writer Corey Pein’s podcast News from Nowhere, at https://www.patreon.com/newsfromnowhere Check out The Nomiki Show live at 3 pm ET on YouTube at patreon.com/thenomikishow Check out Matt’s podcast, Literary Hangover, at Patreon.com/LiteraryHangover, or on iTunes. Check out Jamie’s podcast, The Antifada, at patreon.com/theantifada, on iTunes, or at twitch.tv/theantifada (streaming every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 7pm ET!) Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @Jamie_Elizabeth @MattLech @BF1nn

Peter Casares joined Bates as the head men's and women's swimming and diving coach and aquatics director in 2007, and in 2020 was named NESCAC Women's Swimming Coach of the Year for the second time in his career. He then led the Bates men's swimming and diving team to a program-best fourth place at the NESCAC Men's Championships a week later. A women's-team record 11 athletes, as well as first-year Nathan Berry on the men's team, qualified to compete in the 2020 NCAA Division III Championships before they were canceled due to the pandemic. Coach Casares is well respected in the swimming world, both as an accomplished Division III All-American swimmer and as a passionate coach and tireless recruiter. Peter's expertise and love for the sport have brought enthusiasm and national visibility to the Bates program. Vanessa Williamson '05 was promoted to associate head swimming coach at Bates in 2016 after serving as an assistant coach the previous four years. An eight-time All-America performer in the butterfly and individual medleys, Williamson joined head coach Peter Casares's coaching staff in 2012 after coaching at the high school and club level in California for five years. Williamson is an Edward Little high school graduate and her late father Dick Williamson was a beloved Professor of French at Bates and a 2006 inductee into the Bates Scholar-Athlete society. Vanessa and coach Casares join the Bobcast today as we continue our “Why I Coach” series!

In 2009, Barack Obama was sworn in as the first African American president in this country’s history after a momentous election. But for many in this country, that election was anything but joyous. Soon after, a movement that became known as the Tea Party took shape on the right in opposition to this president and his policies. Fast forward 8 years and a very familiar story seemed to play out, but this time on the left. It became known as The Resistance. PhD candidate Leah Gose explains what similarities and differences exist between these two groups and what we can learn by looking at the two of them together. Check out the Upending American Politics book Read the SSN brief by Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson, Making Sense of the Tea Party

With the help of Jane Mayer's essential 2016 book, Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right, your hosts explore the world of right-wing philanthropy and the institutions—from centers at universities to think tanks in Washington, DC—it has funded. What emerges is a startling history of how a small group of incredibly rich families used novel techniques to shelter their wealth from taxation and fund a right-wing takeover of American politics. Other sources cited and consulted: Theda Skocpol, "Who Owns the GOP?" (a critical review of Mayer in Dissent) Theda Skocpol and Vanessa Williamson, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism Amanda Hollis-Brusky and Calvin Terbeek, "The Federalist Society Says It’s Not an Advocacy Organization. These Documents Show Otherwise." Politico Mark Schmidt "The Legend of the Powell Memo," The American Prospect Honoré de Balzac, Eugénie Grandet (1833)

We’re bringing you a roundup of some of our favorite segments and will be back next week but until then check out conversations with: Vanessa Williamson on taxing the rich; Nick Turner on how we can reimagine prison; and Kristen Arant on how a record can be a life sentence to poverty.

In this episode of Intersections, Vanessa Williamson and Elizabeth Mann Levesque review the Supreme Court's ruling on Janus v. AFSCME, which bars public-sector unions from collecting "fair share" or "agency" fees from non-union members to offset collective bargaining costs. Levesque and Williamson put the Janus case in the context of "right-to-work" legislation, the decline of private-sector unions, and the recent wave of teachers' strikes to assess how the decision will affect public-sector unions in the short term and future of unions' economic and political power more broadly.  Full show notes: https://brook.gs/2Jz61OQ  With thanks to audio producer Gaston Reboredo, Chris McKenna, Brennan Hoban, and Fred Dews for additional support. Send feedback email to intersections@brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at @policypodcasts on Twitter. Intersections is part of the Brookings Podcast Network.

Vanessa Williamson of the Brookings Institution joins Christopher Mitchell to discuss her new book, Read My Lips: Why Americans Are Proud to Pay Taxes, and the changing American attitudes in regard to taxation.… Read More

Raising taxes on the rich encourages job creators to skip town. Or so say some economists and policymakers. This week, Professor Cristobal Young dispels the myth of millionaires leaving high tax states and shows the many ways the wealthy are invested in the places they live. For More on this Topic: Read Young’s piece in The Washington Post on millionaire taxes. Check out Young’s easy to read book, The Myth of Millionaire Tax Flight Further Reading: How States Can Fight Growing Economic Inequality, Megan E. Hatch, Cleveland State University, Elizabeth Rigby, The George Washington University Episode 28: Americans Like Taxes, Vanessa Williamson, Brookings Institution

Americans don't like to be taxed, we're told — after all, who would willingly part with their hard earned money? But according to Vanessa Williamson that assumption is largely incorrect. She has studied attitudes toward paying taxes – and argues that our misperceptions have deleterious consequences, including discounting the contributions of low income people. She also discusses the Republican tax bill — one of the least popular pieces of legislation in recent history. Resources: Vanessa Williamson, Read My Lips: Why Americans Are Proud to Pay Taxes Princeton University Press, 2017 The post Taxing Attitudes appeared first on KPFA.

As Republicans move forward with their tax overhaul, this week’s episode revisits Vanessa Williamson’s interview on the misconception that Americans hate taxes. She outlines how anti-tax policies became popular despite the fact that most Americans support increasing taxes for services they care about.   For more on this topic: Read her brief, Who Pays America’s Taxes?, with Alexander Hertel-Fernandez, Columbia University Check out her opinion piece on Trump’s original tax plan during the 2016 campaign. Further Reading: How Republican Approaches to Social Spending Increase Income Inequality in the United States , Christopher Faricy, Syracuse University Reforming Tax Policy for the Wealthiest One Percent, Michael Nau, The Ohio Colleges of Medicine Government Resource Center

Republicans in Congress say they want tax reform, but tax cuts for the rich are what they’re really pursuing. Back by popular demand, Chye-Ching Huang joins the beginning and end of the show to unpack what the GOP is trying to do, share some music from New Zealand, and crack a solid joke. Jared and Ben also interview Vanessa Williamson and Kimberly Clausing, who talk about the research on Americans’ views of taxes and what real tax reform would look like. Musical Interlude: “History Never Repeats” by Split Enz https://www.nzonscreen.com/title/history-never-repeats-1981/overview

Vanessa Williamson, fellow in Governance Studies, explains why the civic commitment of tax paying makes Americans proud and how misinformation about the tax system can negatively influence public perception of taxes. Also, brought to you by the Brookings Creative Lab "Unpacked" series, George Ingram, senior fellow in Global Economy and Development, breaks down the myths surrounding U.S. foreign aid and explains how providing international aid acts as an investment in making the world more stable and economically prosperous. Subscribe to Brookings podcasts or on , send feedback email to BCP@Brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at @policypodcasts on Twitter. The Brookings Cafeteria is a part of the .  

Are Americans overtaxed? How does the average American feel about the tax system and tax reform? Vanessa Williamson of the Brookings Institution talks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about her book, Read My Lips. Williamson shares the results of her survey of American attitudes toward taxation and government spending. People misperceive much about who pays what and the structure of the tax system, particularly the payroll tax. But some of what appears to be errors--about foreign aid and government waste for example, come from the average person's definition of these terms being different from the narrow meaning.

Democrats and liberals hoping to build a movement against the policies of President Donald Trump should take a page out of the Tea Party's 2010 movement and focus on "policies that build power," says Vanessa Williamson, the co-author of the 2012 book The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism.   Like the tea party in 2010, anti-Trump activists plan to storm lawmakers’ offices and town hall meetings during Congress’ President’s Day recess and Williamson explains what it means for politics and for governance on Capitol Hill.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

2016 marks the 60th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution, which led to mass emigration, with thousands of Hungarians resettling in Canada. Anna Porter, born Anna Szigethy, was a key figure in Canadian publishing for decades and was part of the exodus as a small child. She joins Libby to talk about it. And – The US election is just days away. Libby speaks with Vanessa Williamson a fellow at the Brookings Institute in New York, about the role Zoomers play in selecting the next American President.

2016 marks the 60th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution, which led to mass emigration, with thousands of Hungarians resettling in Canada. Anna Porter, born Anna Szigethy, was a key figure in Canadian publishing for decades and was part of the exodus as a small child. She joins Libby to talk about it. And

Host: Ann Luther, League of Women Voters of Maine     Engineer: Amy Browne Issue: Participatory Democracy Program Topic: Moochers and Freeloaders: Welfare for the Rich, Welfare for the Poor Key Discussion Points: a) We’ll discuss the relationship between free markets and democracy; b) Have the rules of government and markets have been rigged in favor of big money interests and corporations? c) Has populist sentiment has been played to generate resentment over welfare for the poor? d) Who is being served in American democracy today? e) What can ordinary citizen do? What policies should they support? Guests: a) Vanessa Williamson, Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution www.brookings.edu/experts/williamsonv?view=bio b) Garrett Martin, Executive Director of the Maine Center for Economic Policy MECEP Staff Bios The all-volunteer team at the League of Women Voters – Downeast who plan and coordinate this series includes: Linda Hoskins Ann Luther Marge May Pam Person Leah Taylor Linda Washburn FMI re League of Women Voters of Maine: www.lwvme.org

Vanessa Williamson dispels the misconception that Americans hate taxes. In fact, most Americans support taxes and are willing to increase them for services they care about. She outlines how, despite this, anti-tax policies became so popular.

Vanessa Williamson is coauthor (with Theda Skocpol) of The Tea Party: Remaking of Republican Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2012), a New Yorker magazine “Ten Best Political Books of 2012”). Williamson is a Ph.D. student at Harvard University and Skocpol is professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. A lot has been written about the Tea Party, much from journalists and commentators. Williamson and Skocpol add a welcome scholarly vantage point, but don't rest on the distance many academic prefer. They travel the country, interviewing Tea Party advocates, attending Tea Party gatherings in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Arizona. They also mine traditional social science sources of information as well. What results is a nuanced portrait of a very complex modern political phenomenon. The Tea Party, according to Williamson and Skocpol, is in part the result of grassroots activism, part top-down policy entrepreneurship, and part modern media promotion. This book unearths many of the institutional dimensions of the Tea Party movement that help explain how it grew so quickly – 1,000 Tea Party groups formed in just the initial period – and grew so powerful – millions of dollars coalesced to help fund, train, and mobilize supporters and candidates. The electoral successes in the 2010 elections and subsequent policy victories in state tax, budget, and voting policy are the most obvious legacy to date. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vanessa Williamson is coauthor (with Theda Skocpol) of The Tea Party: Remaking of Republican Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2012), a New Yorker magazine “Ten Best Political Books of 2012”). Williamson is a Ph.D. student at Harvard University and Skocpol is professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. A lot has been written about the Tea Party, much from journalists and commentators. Williamson and Skocpol add a welcome scholarly vantage point, but don’t rest on the distance many academic prefer. They travel the country, interviewing Tea Party advocates, attending Tea Party gatherings in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Arizona. They also mine traditional social science sources of information as well. What results is a nuanced portrait of a very complex modern political phenomenon. The Tea Party, according to Williamson and Skocpol, is in part the result of grassroots activism, part top-down policy entrepreneurship, and part modern media promotion. This book unearths many of the institutional dimensions of the Tea Party movement that help explain how it grew so quickly – 1,000 Tea Party groups formed in just the initial period – and grew so powerful – millions of dollars coalesced to help fund, train, and mobilize supporters and candidates. The electoral successes in the 2010 elections and subsequent policy victories in state tax, budget, and voting policy are the most obvious legacy to date. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vanessa Williamson is coauthor (with Theda Skocpol) of The Tea Party: Remaking of Republican Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2012), a New Yorker magazine “Ten Best Political Books of 2012”). Williamson is a Ph.D. student at Harvard University and Skocpol is professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. A lot has been written about the Tea Party, much from journalists and commentators. Williamson and Skocpol add a welcome scholarly vantage point, but don't rest on the distance many academic prefer. They travel the country, interviewing Tea Party advocates, attending Tea Party gatherings in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Arizona. They also mine traditional social science sources of information as well. What results is a nuanced portrait of a very complex modern political phenomenon. The Tea Party, according to Williamson and Skocpol, is in part the result of grassroots activism, part top-down policy entrepreneurship, and part modern media promotion. This book unearths many of the institutional dimensions of the Tea Party movement that help explain how it grew so quickly – 1,000 Tea Party groups formed in just the initial period – and grew so powerful – millions of dollars coalesced to help fund, train, and mobilize supporters and candidates. The electoral successes in the 2010 elections and subsequent policy victories in state tax, budget, and voting policy are the most obvious legacy to date.

Vanessa Williamson is coauthor (with Theda Skocpol) of The Tea Party: Remaking of Republican Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2012), a New Yorker magazine “Ten Best Political Books of 2012”). Williamson is a Ph.D. student at Harvard University and Skocpol is professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. A lot has been written about the Tea Party, much from journalists and commentators. Williamson and Skocpol add a welcome scholarly vantage point, but don’t rest on the distance many academic prefer. They travel the country, interviewing Tea Party advocates, attending Tea Party gatherings in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Arizona. They also mine traditional social science sources of information as well. What results is a nuanced portrait of a very complex modern political phenomenon. The Tea Party, according to Williamson and Skocpol, is in part the result of grassroots activism, part top-down policy entrepreneurship, and part modern media promotion. This book unearths many of the institutional dimensions of the Tea Party movement that help explain how it grew so quickly – 1,000 Tea Party groups formed in just the initial period – and grew so powerful – millions of dollars coalesced to help fund, train, and mobilize supporters and candidates. The electoral successes in the 2010 elections and subsequent policy victories in state tax, budget, and voting policy are the most obvious legacy to date. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Vanessa Williamson is coauthor (with Theda Skocpol) of The Tea Party: Remaking of Republican Conservatism (Oxford University Press, 2012), a New Yorker magazine “Ten Best Political Books of 2012”). Williamson is a Ph.D. student at Harvard University and Skocpol is professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. A lot has been written about the Tea Party, much from journalists and commentators. Williamson and Skocpol add a welcome scholarly vantage point, but don’t rest on the distance many academic prefer. They travel the country, interviewing Tea Party advocates, attending Tea Party gatherings in Virginia, Massachusetts, and Arizona. They also mine traditional social science sources of information as well. What results is a nuanced portrait of a very complex modern political phenomenon. The Tea Party, according to Williamson and Skocpol, is in part the result of grassroots activism, part top-down policy entrepreneurship, and part modern media promotion. This book unearths many of the institutional dimensions of the Tea Party movement that help explain how it grew so quickly – 1,000 Tea Party groups formed in just the initial period – and grew so powerful – millions of dollars coalesced to help fund, train, and mobilize supporters and candidates. The electoral successes in the 2010 elections and subsequent policy victories in state tax, budget, and voting policy are the most obvious legacy to date. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

7 AM - Louisville won the NCAA championship; Kim Kardashian's ex-bf put out a song called "I Hit It First"; Vanessa Williamson talks about her new book "The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism".

Trey welcomes Lee Drutman, Vanessa Williamson and Felcia Wong to the show to discuss their latest report and study through the democracy fund voter study group ( https://www.voterstudygroup.org ) : On the Money ( https://www.voterstudygroup.org/publication/on-the-money ). Topics discussed include: * why study voter's economic policy preferences * why Republicans do not share an economic policy position * the difference for people's individual policy preferences and their overall policy goals * the role of luck in economic policy views * the predictive power of economic policy views in American elections * Donald Trump and Republican economic policy views *Listener support helps make The Politics Guys possible*. If you're interested in supporting the show, go to patreon.com/politicsguys ( https://www.patreon.com/politicsguys ) or politicsguys.com/support ( http://www.politicsguys.com/support ). Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/the-politics-guys/donations Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands Privacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy