But it is hardly the colossus of right-wing mythology. For proof of ACORN's meager influence, one need only look at the swift action by Congress to cut off its funding and compare that to the fate of other government contractors under a cloud of far more damning revelations.
With the notable exception of handing over $700 billion to Wall Street
last year, the United States Congress is not known for quick, decisive
action. But recently, in a resounding bipartisan vote, members of both
houses voted to deny federal dollars to the Association of Community
Organizations for Reform Now. Over the past fifteen years, ACORN and its
affiliates have received on average about $3.5 million a year from the
government, or approximately one-millionth of this year's budget.
The votes came just a few days after the release of a series of (now
infamous) videos in which young right-wing activists James O'Keefe and
Hannah Giles pose as a pimp and a prostitute. They take a hidden camera
to a number of ACORN tax preparation offices around the country seeking
tax and business advice. (Why a pimp and prostitute? Who the hell knows.
Neither answered my request for an interview.)
The undercover duo provoked responses from ACORN staff that ranged from
the unconscionable (an employee in Baltimore reacting to O'Keefe's plan
to bring in thirteen Salvadoran girls as prostitutes with the suggestion
he claim some as dependents) to the obviously sketchy (a Brooklyn tax
adviser suggesting the couple put their cash profits in a can and bury
it in the backyard) to the praiseworthy (the ACORN offices in
Philadelphia called the cops and filed a police report)--O'Keefe and
Giles haven't seen fit to post that tape. Mostly, though, the tapes are
a testament to what might be called the Borat Effect: human beings'
intense socialization to be helpful and not rock the boat, even when
confronted with someone doing something objectionable, outrageous or
preposterous.
But if the disconcerting contents of the videos were the proximate cause
of ACORN's Congressional rebuke, it is the organization's mission that
made it a target. Since the 1970s, ACORN has committed itself
steadfastly to building power for poor people. "Unlike almost any other
institution on the left," a former organizer told me, "they constantly
gravitate toward the most fucked-over people." Not surprisingly, this
makes America's right wing furious. O'Keefe says he was inspired to pull
the stunt after watching a video that showed ACORN engaging in civil
disobedience by breaking the padlock on a foreclosed home and escorting
its locked-out owner inside. The video, O'Keefe told the Washington
Post, made him "upset."
For the past several years, reactionaries of every stripe have waged a
relentless campaign aimed at delegitimizing ACORN, and the
organization's manifold dysfunctions have given them a steady stream of
ammunition. "When I was working for them we'd hired all these low-income
people, and we couldn't even get them their paychecks on time," another
former ACORN organizer told me. "We were losing really good employees.
It comes from this place where there's so much work to do, we don't do
logistics because there's always a crisis. But logistics matter."
Last year news broke that the brother of Wade Rathke, who founded ACORN,
had embezzled nearly $1 million. Rathke didn't disclose it to the board.
The revelations precipitated a change in management and a much-needed
self-evaluation, a process formalized by ACORN's announcement that
former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger will "lead an
independent inquiry into the organizational systems and processes
surrounding the social services of the organization."
For all its organizational problems, ACORN does vital, indispensable,
unglamorous work: it trains legions of organizers, builds grassroots
leadership and wages disciplined and effective local and statewide
campaigns, such as its minimum-wage effort in Florida in 2004.
But it is hardly the colossus of right-wing mythology. For proof of
ACORN's meager influence, one need only look at the swift action by
Congress to cut off its funding and compare that to the fate of other
government contractors under a cloud of far more damning revelations.
Like, for instance, Blackwater. As my colleague Jeremy Scahill has
reported, a recent federal audit suggests that Blackwater may owe the
government $55 million allegedly for failing to meet the terms of just
one of its federal contracts. Five of its employees face murder charges
for their role in the massacre of Iraqi civilians in Baghdad's Nisour
Square. Yet Blackwater's $217 million security contract in Iraq was just
extended indefinitely by the Obama administration. Or consider former
Halliburton subsidiary KBR, which received $80 million in contract
bonuses to provide electrical wiring in Iraq; so far, sixteen soldiers
and two contractors have died from electrocution from that wiring,
precipitating a comprehensive Defense Department review. And in what was
perhaps the most buried news story of the summer, there was
pharmaceutical giant Pfizer's $2.3 billion fraud settlement with the
Justice Department for its illegal promotion of painkiller Bextra and
other drugs. According to fedspending.org, Pfizer had more than $73
million in federal contracts in 2007 alone.
But the government contracts of Blackwater, KBR and Pfizer remain
intact. (In a delicious bit of irony, the legislation defunding ACORN
was written so broadly that Representative Alan Grayson and the Project
on Government Oversight have compiled a list of firms they say fit the
defunding criteria, and it reads like a Who's Who of the
military-industrial complex.)
The disparity in the treatment of Blackwater et al. and ACORN is part of
a larger American problem, what might be called the Inequality of
Accountability. We diligently apply the principle of accountability to
the poor and the powerless, and the principle of forgiveness to the
wealthy and powerful.
Even before it was punked by a couple of right-wing twenty-somethings,
nobody knew that better than ACORN.
Please log in below through Disqus, Twitter or Facebook to participate in the conversation. Your email address, which is required for a Disqus account, will not be publicly displayed. If you sign in with Twitter or Facebook, you have the option of publishing your comments in those streams as well.
Your tax-deductible gift will help bring promising new voices and ideas into our nation's discourse, and help shape the future of vital public policies.
Join the Conversation
Please log in below through Disqus, Twitter or Facebook to participate in the conversation. Your email address, which is required for a Disqus account, will not be publicly displayed. If you sign in with Twitter or Facebook, you have the option of publishing your comments in those streams as well.