democratic deliberation and civic activity

. Such organizations include state and local arms of the
major political parties, federated voluntary associations such as the PTA and the Lions Clubs,
neighborhood governing councils, and even temporary structures such as community meetings
and civic forums.
In recent years, there is some evidence that the local political parties have begun reviving the
grassroots efforts of old. We must take care to provide continuing incentives to bolster the locals’
work in the field. And we must find ways to tip the balance away from capital-intensive “air war”
strategies that dominate our national politics and toward the volunteer-reliant grassroots strategies
that characterize election activity in early primary states such as New Hampshire.
We further endorse using public policy, whether tinkering with the tax code or changing the
lobbying rules, to encourage the revival of cross-class federated voluntary organizations, which
represent the moderate middle Americans who have lately been AWOL from American political
activism.
21
 These organizations represent an important forum for furthering our  “Bridging”
principle.
Finally, we wholeheartedly support the efforts of cities such as Portland, Ore., and St. Paul,
Minn., to create neighborhood councils with  real decision-making power. Government officials
have long won political points by creating advisory groups and espousing neighborhood input,
but too often these efforts have amounted to little more than half-hearted political gesture. Where
local governments have made good-faith efforts to create neighborhood councils with real control
over zoning changes, planning decisions, and financial resources, and where local governments
mandate consultation with those councils, the results have been impressive. According to an
important study by political scientists Jeffrey M. Berry, Kent E. Portney, and Ken Thomson,
citizen participation in such neighborhood councils had a raft of good results. It enhanced the
participants’ sense of community, knowledge of local affairs, and tolerance toward difference;
brought important issues to the fore; and redressed power imbalances that had worked to the
detriment of everyday citizens.
22
 Such neighborhood councils also provide forums for training
leaders who otherwise would never have realized their potential for civic contributions.
Grassroots involvement can work on a national scale, as well. In Canada during the 1970s,
Minister of Health Marjorie Begin secured massive health insurance reform even though the
debate was just as polarized as it has been recently in the United States. Begin believed that
Canadian citizens would favor health care reform if they understood the proposals and the stakes
involved, and she knew that, without broad public deliberation, special interests (insurance
companies, hospitals, doctors’ associations, etc.) would hijack the debate.  Begin secured public
funds to rent halls for public meetings, hire facilitators, and notify the public about the events.
The press and Parliament immediately heard from the grassroots. From the perspective of
broadening civic engagement, the United States would clearly benefit by following Canada’s
example, regardless of what substantive policy proposals emerged from the citizen deliberations.
Suppose, for example, we sought solutions to the Social Security dilemma through broad-based,
carefully prepared public deliberation, rather than merely  “blue-ribbon” commissions of
professional politicians.