Common Ground

Brian D Smith

We're more divided than ever — or are we? Common Ground is a space to step back from the shouting and ask a different question: what do we actually agree on? Host Brian D. Smith explores the values, hopes, and blind spots we share across the political divide — no debate-team scoring, no gotchas, just honest conversation about the ground we all stand on. grief2growth.substack.com

Episodes

  1. Aug 12

    Why We Can’t Have Nice Things

    There’s a reason Congress is in Article I of the Constitution and the presidency is in Article II. The founders didn’t put the executive first. They put us first: through representatives, checked by a Constitution. They did not want a king, and they didn’t want mob rule. Not a pure democracy. A republic. The people’s branch, listed first, on purpose. The President is supposed to execute the laws Congress makes. That’s why it’s called the Executive branch. So here’s the question that should bother you. If the system was built to put power in our hands, why does it feel like we never get what we actually want? Table of Contents * We Agree More Than We’re Told We Do * Issues, Not Ideology * Because Congress Isn’t Working for You * How Far Do We Go? * A Bigger Dream * Where We Go From Here We Agree More Than We’re Told We Do Turn on the news, and you’d think America is split down the middle on everything. It isn’t. From the earliest days of this country, the wealthy and powerful have used one tool to stay on top: keep the rest of us fighting each other instead of looking up. It’s class warfare dressed up as culture war. I hear some saying we don’t want class warfare. We’ve been in it since the beginning. But the middle and lower classes have unilaterally disarmed. It’s never been more effective than it is right now. It’s also never been easier to see, if you know where to look. Look at the polling. Not one poll, not one pollster with an agenda, but the pattern across many of them, on issue after issue. The exact number moves depending on who’s asking and how the question is worded. That’s true of every poll on every topic. But the pattern is undeniable. On issue after issue, Americans land in the same place, in some cases huge majorities. Democrats. Republicans. Independents. Yet, here we are— not getting what we want. This isn’t a left or right issue. It’s a top-versus-bottom issue. Issues, Not Ideology Healthcare. Whatever you call the fix, most Americans think the system is broken and want the government to do more, not less. Polling on some version of Medicare for All has landed anywhere from the low 50s to mid 60s depending on how it’s framed, but it’s been a majority position for years now. The Affordable Care Act was demonized even while most conservatives liked most of what was in it. Progressives didn’t like it because it didn’t go far enough. The polling lumped both groups together in saying they didn’t like it. Money in politics. This might be the least controversial issue in America and the most ignored. Poll after poll, going back over a decade, across every methodology, shows roughly 60% to 80%+ of Americans, across party lines, want less corporate and dark money in our elections. Our Supreme Court has ruled corporations are people and money is speech. Who actually buys that? Taxing the wealthy. Ask Americans if billionaires and large corporations should pay more, and majorities from around 60% up into the 70s say yes, including a meaningful chunk of Republicans every single time. Income tax rates used to top out at over 90% marginal rates, and it wasn’t socialism. Reproductive rights. Most Americans favor legal access to abortion in most or all cases, even in states where the laws don’t reflect that. The Electoral College. A majority of Americans, across parties, have told pollsters for years they’d prefer the popular vote decide the presidency. The Electoral College is an archaic system designed to protect slave holding states. It makes no sense. Military aid to Israel. Public opinion has shifted hard here in the last two years. Recent polling, Quinnipiac among others, puts opposition to sending more weapons at roughly 60%, including a majority of independents. Paid family leave and childcare. This one isn’t close. Support routinely runs into the 70s, red states included. A pathway to citizenship. Majorities well above 60% consistently favor a legal path for undocumented immigrants already here, even alongside support for border security. The choice of open borders versus the punitive, complicated, and cruel system we have now is a false choice. LGBT protections. Broad, durable majorities, well past 60%, support basic anti-discrimination protections. Supreme Court reform. Trust in the Court has cratered enough that ideas like term limits and ethics rules poll in the 70s and 80s, across party lines. Almost no one is happy with our current court and system. Gun reform. Background checks and other common-sense measures poll well above 60%, including among a majority of gun owners. Again, we’re presented with a false choice of “taking away our guns” or no gun laws at all. Criminal justice reform. Majorities in the 70s support sentencing and policing reforms, even when the word “reform” itself has become politically loaded. Legal weed. This one’s basically settled. Legalization polls around 70%, and has for years. A living minimum wage. Raising the federal minimum wage polls in the 60s, sometimes higher, in red and blue states alike. Climate action. Some version of aggressive climate investment, jobs plus emissions, polls at a majority, even as the phrase “Green New Deal” itself polarizes people who agree with what’s actually in it. Affordable housing. Nobody’s against this one. It polls around 70% because everyone, everywhere, is feeling it. These aren’t 51-49 wedge issues. Most of them are 60-40, 70-30, sometimes 80-20. On any other topic, that margin would be called a landslide mandate. So why doesn’t any of it happen? Because Congress Isn’t Working for You Here’s the uncomfortable answer: Congress is bought. Both parties. Not equally, not identically, but both. I know “bought” is a strong word. Call it what you want: access, influence, “the way things work.” But when a corporation or a billionaire donates seven or eight figures to a campaign, they’re not doing it out of civic pride. And it’s certainly not charity. It’s an investment, and investments are made expecting a return. And boy, do they get them. In April 2024, Donald Trump sat down with about twenty oil and gas executives at Mar-a-Lago for what got called an “Energy Round Table.” One executive had the audacity to complain that the industry had spent $400 million lobbying Washington the year before and still couldn’t get the regulations it wanted. Trump’s answer, according to the Washington Post: you’re all wealthy enough that you should raise a billion dollars to put me back in the White House. They didn’t donate a billion dollars. But they donated by the multiple millions. And the ask? Roll back environmental rules, lift the freeze on gas export permits, open more drilling leases in the Gulf, and the industry’s money would follow. They donated, and Trump delivered. Executives who helped raise it later landed seats in the administration itself, including one who became Energy Secretary. Within months of Trump’s return to office, the drilling leases opened, the export freeze lifted, and the emissions rules came down, pretty much exactly as promised at that dinner. That’s just one example. I’m not picking on Trump. I’m not picking on the Republicans. It happens on both sides. Both parties talk about serving the people. Both parties, when the money’s on the table, serve whoever put the money there. it. A pox on both their houses. The real divide in this country isn’t red versus blue. It’s the people who write the checks against everybody else, and everybody else is most of us, whichever way we vote. How Far Do We Go? The DSA has been getting a lot of attention lately for a platform that goes further than I would: abolishing the U.S. Senate entirely and replacing the presidency and the Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by, and answerable to, Congress. They’re nuts. That’s a real position, formally adopted, not a strawman. DSA’s own co-chairs have confirmed it on camera. We don’t need to go that far. Blowing up the structure isn’t the fix. The structure was designed to represent us; it got captured, that’s all. You … This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit grief2growth.substack.com/subscribe

  2. Jul 29

    What Is a Democratic Socialist? And Am I One?

    Wondering why you’re getting this? * You signed up for Grief 2 Growth, and this is Common Ground — a different lens, same writer. * New here? Start with What Common Ground Is and Isn’t. * This is where I write about the systems and policies shaping how we live and care for each other — not partisan takes, just where we actually agree. * Not for you? Opt out anytime and keep everything else from Grief 2 Growth. Just visit the link and turn off notifications for Common Ground When I was a kid, communism was the scariest word in the English language for a lot of people, not for me. I grew up in the Cold War, in a church and a culture that taught me communists were coming for us. The word got conflated, casually and constantly, with another word that supposedly meant the same dangerous thing: socialism. The two became one boogeyman. If you flirted with one, you were halfway to the other, and the other meant gulags, atheism, and the end of everything good. I never bought into the hype. But a lot of people my age did. The word socialist isn’t as scary to a new generation. Table of Contents * Then I Met Libertarianism * Then, Reluctantly, I Became a Democrat * Then the Word Came Back * Three Different Things Wearing One Name * Then I Read the Platform * Both Extremes End in the Same Place * So I Built a Survey and Took It Myself * So Here’s Where I Land * No Ceiling. A Steep Slope. * One Last Thought Then I Met Libertarianism Somewhere in adulthood, I came across the word “libertarian,” and for the first time, a political label felt like it might fit. The pitch was simple. People should be free to do whatever they want, alone or with another consenting adult, as long as they aren’t harming anyone else. That sounded right to me. Still does. I’m all about personal freedom. I wore the label for a while. Not loudly. Just quietly, as a way to describe how I thought people ought to be left alone to live their lives. Then I followed it to its logical conclusion. At its extreme, libertarianism is every man for himself. Take it far enough, and you don’t have public libraries. You don’t have a fire department that comes for free. You don’t have police. I hear libertarians say taxation is theft. They want a government small enough to drown in the bathtub. No thanks. I like libraries. I want the fire truck to show up. And the idea of the do what you want as long as you do not harm principle turned out to have nothing to say about what happens when the bank forecloses on your house, or your kid gets cancer, or your employer decides you’re disposable. Freedom from interference is one thing. Freedom to actually live a decent life is another. So I set the label down. Then, Reluctantly, I Became a Democrat Eventually I accepted a different one. Democrat. I didn’t love it. Of the available containers, it just held the most of what I actually believed. But here’s the strange thing. Most of my closest friends are Republicans. And when we sit down and really talk, we agree on most of what matters. Women making their own medical decisions. Sensible limits on who can buy a gun. Equal treatment under the law, all of it, no asterisks. Anybody willing to work getting a real shot at a decent life. One night, after a long conversation and more bourbon than either of us needed, one of those friends sat back and asked me a question I still think about. “Brian, am I a Democrat?” She wasn’t converting. She was noticing. We had just spent three hours agreeing on nearly everything, and the labels we’d been handed didn’t account for it. This is a conversation I’ve had with many lifelong Republicans. Turns out most Americans agree on many major social issues. It’s the politicians and the media telling us we disagree. Then the Word Came Back Lately, I keep running into the term democratic socialism. What is this shiny new thing? I got curious. What is a democratic socialist? Am I one? I went and looked it up. And what I found is that I had been asking the wrong question. Three Different Things Wearing One Name Here’s what nobody told me, and what I suspect nobody told you either. There are three separate things, and people use one word for all of them. Social democracy. Capitalism stays. Companies stay privately owned. Markets still decide what gets made and who makes it. But taxes are high, regulation has teeth, and healthcare, education, childcare, and retirement are guaranteed to everybody. This is Denmark. This is also what FDR was going for in 1944, when he proposed an economic bill of rights and died before he could finish it. Democratic socialism. All of the above, plus one more step. The goal is that ownership of the economy itself eventually changes hands, moving to workers and the public, arrived at through elections rather than revolution. Capitalism is a stage to move past, not a system to harness. The DSA. The Democratic Socialists of America, the largest organized group in this country flying that flag. Their platform goes considerably further than the second category. More on that in a minute. They’re not an actual party. They have a platform, and they support candidates that run under the Democratic Party. Here’s how confused this is. Bernie Sanders calls himself a democratic socialist and points at Denmark. In 2015, Denmark’s prime minister went to Harvard specifically to correct Bernie, telling the room that Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. That was a center-right politician defending his country against what Bernie meant as a compliment. Then I Read the Platform I want to be fair here, so I did the thing you’re supposed to do. I read the DSA’s actual platform instead of letting anyone summarize it for me. I’ll be honest about my reaction. Oh my God. Their platform calls for cutting police budgets every year until they reach zero. For disarming law enforcement. For closing jails and freeing people currently incarcerated. They describe their own goal as the horizon of abolition. It doesn’t stop at policing. It calls for abolishing the Senate and the Electoral College, holding a new constitutional convention to write new founding documents, replacing the presidency and Supreme Court with bodies answerable to Congress, withdrawing from NATO, and closing every American military base overseas. (I’m not opposed to abolishing the Electoral College by the way). That’s not a hostile summary from cable news. That’s their website. Nope. I’m not ready to get my DSA card. And it’s current. Their co-chair went on television this month, got walked through those planks one by one, and confirmed them. Sanders doesn’t go there. Asked directly about abolishing police departments, he said he does not think we should be without them, that there’s no city in the world without a police department. He took real heat from the left for it. So the largest organization wearing the label and the most famous man wearing the label disagree about one of the most basic questions there is. The people running on the Democratic ticket under DSA endorsement are running far right of where the DSA’s official platform is. And, I think that’s a good thing. Both Extremes End in the Same Place Follow libertarianism to its edge, and you get no police. Follow the DSA platform to its edge, and you get no police. Opposite directions. Same destination. I’ve now been pushed away from two political labels by the exact same thing, arriving from opposite sides. Because I want police. I want them in my neighborhood. I want them to come when I call. I want them in my daughters’ neighborhoods too. I’m also a Black man who grew up understanding exactly what a traffic stop can turn into. Both of those are true at once, and there’s no contradiction in that. I avoid police whenever possible. Turns out I’m not unusual. Gallup asked Black Americans how much time they wanted police spending in their neighborhoods. Sixty-one percent said keep it the same. Only 19 percent wanted less. In a separate survey, just 22 percent favored abolishing police departments, even though 71 percent knew someone who’d been tr… This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit grief2growth.substack.com/subscribe

About

We're more divided than ever — or are we? Common Ground is a space to step back from the shouting and ask a different question: what do we actually agree on? Host Brian D. Smith explores the values, hopes, and blind spots we share across the political divide — no debate-team scoring, no gotchas, just honest conversation about the ground we all stand on. grief2growth.substack.com