Wisely, Lozada admits that “some suggest historical influence has been exaggerated,” and he cites Mark Schmitt’s thorough and insightful treatment thereof in Washington Monthly a couple of years ago. She concludes the volume with her own counter-version of the Memo, a “Public Memorandum” entitled “Advancing American Democracy,” addressed to “Progressive Americans.”
POWELL MEMO HOW TO
This came to mind last week when Carlos Lozada reviewed two books for The Washington Post-one of which, Caroline Fredrickson’s The Democracy Fix: How to Win the Fight for Fair Rules, Fair Courts, and Fair Elections, once again argued that all conservative policy success followed directly from the Powell Memo, which she describes as “the road map for conservative dominance of public policymaking.” She proceeds to trace the Memo’s influence throughout all the familiar conservative think tanks, scholars, publications, activist nonprofits, and university programs, with heavy emphasis on their manifest intention to subvert American democracy. Hall agreed with me then that the reputation of the elusive Powell document had probably far exceeded its actual influence. I had heardof it by then, but only because persistent rumors had it that my entire career was but a fulfillment of the Memo’s mandate.
So surely, he suggested, I must have a copy of the document-perhaps framed and mounted above my desk, next to my copy of the Constitution.Įxcept that I didn’t have a copy.
But he knew me to be a loyal employee of a conservative foundation, given no doubt to an exaggerated respect for founders’ and donors’ intents. For all its fame as the essential blueprint for conservative public-policy dominance, Hall had been unable to come up with a copy.
0 kommentar(er)
