Learn more about who we are, what we do and our plans for the future in this FAQs section.
Launched on July 4, 2020, In This Together is a campaign to help save the environment and repair our democracy by growing a diverse bipartisan community of America’s silenced majority: common sense problem-solvers who have been marginalized by the politics of fear, anger, and division.
Our strategy is to harness and combine the distinctive powers of small and specialized NGOs to create a force for change more powerful than the sum of its parts. We channel support to strategic NGO’s to multiple and broaden their support base to motivate and reward businesses and political leaders to make change happen.
In This Together was seed funded by members of the Donor Roundtable, a network of HNW donors building an alternative datacomm infrastructure to magnify the power of the common sense 70% of voters who support bipartisan solutions on issues such as climate.
To meet global challenges like climate change and reuniting our polarized democracy, America needs a bipartisan governing majority. We seem to be more divided than ever, our blue and red halves are taught to fear and hate each other, leaving us unable to meet any major challenge, from COVID and climate change to cultural warfare and the collapse of the middle class.
Americans, however, aren’t nearly as divided as we seem. Over 7 out of 10 are common sense problem-solvers willing to join together to tackle any challenge. But inside our separated echo chambers, many Americans feel alone and politically disenfranchised in a world gone crazy.
IN THIS TOGETHER links together the politically disenfranchised of the left and right, in order to form the basis of what can become a common sense governing supermajority. First to tackle climate change, and in the process realize one of our highest aspirations, a healthy functional democracy.
Problem-solvers are a defined group of citizens, business and political leaders, and NGO advocates willing to reach across their divides to resolve conflicts and solve problems, and who resist the politics of demonization and endless cultural warfare.
The Citizen Data platform as well as the Core Strategic predictive model we developed enables us to identify, reach, and activate citizens who fit the profile of common sense problem-solvers. The models used by these two separate providers differ, but in essence they both identify voters who hold ideologically mixed positions on issues, have an optimistic outlook, believe they can make a difference, and prefer pragmatic problem-solving to ideological purity.
Our national database contains enriched data on over 150 million registered voters. Among these are the subgroups we call Solution Citizens:
- 98 million we call the Common Sense majority, who tend to be pragmatic and non-ideological.
- Among these 98 million, 44.6 million Problem-Solvers, who tend to be optimistic, empowered, tolerant, and pragmatic.
- Among these 44.6 million, nearly 15 million Bridge-Builders, who like to connect diverse people and ideas together as inclusive wholes.
- Across all three of these, 14 million “premium” Solution Citizens – potential leaders who are our highest priorities for recruitment.
These 98 million are americas silenced majority. The politically homeless that dont feel completely comfortable in one party and would never join the other one. The majority are silenced because the political strategists divide them into 2 separate media echo chambers each designed to block them from finding common purpose with their counterparts on the other side.
We can return governing power to the broad 70% of Americans if 5% of bridge that divide and bring americas left and right back together to take on the challenge we face. Our reward can be a democracy that is real and solutions that work.
Every state and district has a large population of Solution Citizens. For example, in California’s Orange County and Inland Empire – a critical battleground that could determine control of the House – we have identified 660,000 problem-solvers.
In 2022, In This Together will combine our data, modeling, deliberative polling, and messaging tools for the first time, to recruit and activate a 5% base of Solution Citizens in at least one major political battleground, to achieve three objectives:
- First, to make it politically advantageous for Republican as well as Democratic candidates to support the bipartisan Climate of Unity agenda.
- Second, to shift the competition from a contest between hyper-partisan extremists to a choice between different kinds of solutions.
- Third, to continue to grow and expand the Solution Citizen base inside the region and across 10 battlegrounds as rapidly as funding allows.
In competitive races where typical winning margins are 2% or less, a 5% base of problem-solvers can break the tie and give a decisive advantage to candidates with solutions. Using the predictive model we will employ, the strategy has been successful in 14 of 19 races so far.
No. This is voter education, not electioneering. We will inform voters of which candidates have demonstrated they are problem-solvers, based on measurement tools by No Labels, Common Ground, and nonpartisan community leaders.
America in One Room (A1R), the largest-ever exercise in deliberative democracy funded by Donor Roundtable and Helena Foundation contributors, validated the two priorities of In This Together. It showed that democracy can work, and that a bipartisan supermajority for fact-based climate solutions is within reach.
Following the two paths charted by A1R, In This Together will connect strategic NGOs and citizens to launch two campaigns:
CLIMATE OF UNITY links nonpartisan environmental groups together in support of conservation, clean energy, and a price on carbon – policies supported by a strong bipartisan majority of informed Americans.
To drive bipartisan climate solutions with strong business and NGO support, the most important NGO coalitions will link The Nature Conservancy, Citizens Climate Lobby, Climate Leadership Council, Clear Path, Ducks Unlimited, Trout Unlimited, Conservative Energy Network, American Conservation Coalition, and EarthX Power of Ten.
THE SOCIAL SOLUTION links together strategic democracy reformers and civic problem-solvers to provide safe opportunities for red and blue Americans to solve problems together – bringing the “in one room” model for everyday Americans to apply.
To successfully shift political incentives and dollars from polarization to problem-solving, the most important NGO collaborations will link the ERB Institute at UMich, Bridge Alliance, BridgeUSA, Business for America, Listen First, AllSides.com, and Living Room Conversation.
Climate cannot be reliably protected without federal legislation in the U.S. backed by majorities of both Republicans and Democrats. Unfortunately, many leading environmental donors inadvertently turn both conservatives and progressives against necessary climate action.
For example, because the optics are less positive than for solar and wind, donors often fail to support advocacy of hydrogen, new generation nuclear, and carbon capture, use, and sequestration. This reduces support from conservative Republicans as well as centrists and moderate Democrats.
Because carbon pricing is cast as a tax to conservatives, as ineffective and regressive to progressives, and as politically nonviable to both, many donors fail to fund carbon pricing NGOs. All three of these perceptions are flawed. Informed conservatives, progressives, economists, and scientists largely agree that carbon pricing is the most efficient and effective way to drive innovation to reduce carbon intensity. Structured as a revenue-neutral fee-and-dividend system, carbon prices benefit the poor, working, and middle classes more than the wealthy. Politically, this has helped grow an underlying bipartisan support base of lawmakers who privately favor carbon pricing and who will come forward when political cover is provided to protect them from extremists on the far right and left. Serious environmental donors need to understand that success is impossible without Republican support and progressive tolerance for market-based approaches. Republican support will be weak until these lawmakers have reason to believe they won’t be “primaried.” This requires an organized base of Republicans who support climate problem-solvers in competitive primaries. It also requires progressive Democrats to support carbon pricing systems like fee-and-dividend, which meet their criteria of equity.
We link together NGOs who bring complementary assets to the table – different skills, roles, and constituents such that, when combined, the whole is more effective than the sum of the parts. In this case, that means they can ensure bipartisan support for climate protection, including a broad range of options and a price on carbon.
Applying methods developed over 25 years at Future 500, we first inventory and map the stakeholders to a specific problem or issue. We link together those that complement each other, and fill gaps between them that prevent effective collaboration.
For example, to remove barriers to climate protection, it is important for major Republican donors to step up and support climate protection. To ensure bipartisan support for carbon pricing, it is important for progressive leaders to lend their active support.
Both these goals can be advanced by harnessing together selected assets of Citizens Climate Lobby and Climate Leadership Council. Both are dedicated to a fee-and-dividend carbon pricing policy. CCL has a magnificent grassroots base that includes many conservatives, but little inside-the-beltway influence. CLC has almost no grassroots base, but major beltway influence, and influential Republican donors.
Similarly, a number of inside-the-beltway groups support conservative and Republican-friendly climate solutions. But they do not take a position on carbon pricing. Their internal positions vary, and open advocacy could stress their existing allies. A Climate of Unity campaign can advance both their agendas: carbon pricing as supported by CCL and CLC, as well as conservative energy policy advocated by a broader NGO spectrum.
Online recruitment will be tested with segments of the 44.6 million problem-solver voters in 50 states identified by our national Citizen Data analysts. We will prioritize 10 battleground states and regions, in competitive primary and general election races, via digital advertising, social media posts, YouTube videos, online petitions, text messages, and a phone bank.
Our first on-the-ground campaign will be in California’s Orange County and Inland Empire, now a key battleground split 50-50 between red and blue voters. More than $100 million may flow into the region to accentuate and heighten mutual fear and animosity between the tribes. Then campaign strategists will battle to get their most outraged voters to the polls.
We will strategically disrupt the effectiveness of polarization by activating a base of 100,000 in between the outraged left and right. Comprising 5% of voters, these common sense problem-solvers will have the power to break the tie and elect the better problem-solver among the candidates. Our objective is not to elect any particular candidate, but to create an electoral incentive for all major candidates to be problem-solvers.
Voters will commit to vote only for common sense candidates who are proven problem-solvers as defined above. This ensures that Common Sense Republicans and Democrats have something in common.
To assess our impact, we plan to partner with a leading civic health organization to measure polarization before and after the campaign. But the most important indicator of success will be if all candidates in competitive races compete for problem-solver votes, or if in contests with polarizers, problem-solvers gain the advantage.
Success is a “yes” answer to most of these questions:
- Did Republicans as well as Democrats support Climate of Unity policies in the primary?
- Did both federal/state candidates in the general support Climate of Unity policies?
- If only one candidate did, did that candidate win?
- Was political polarization measurably reduced (as assessed by civic health criteria)?
- Did we create awareness that candidates who appeal to the center on climate have the electoral advantage?
- Did we prove that problem-solvers can be protected from extremists in the primary?