Scott Wiener is the Progressive for Congress
It's not progressive to block more homes, buses, and trains.
Words matter. The right slogan, whether “Black Lives Matter” or MAGA, can define the lens through which both supporters and opponents view a political issue.
That’s why I refuse to concede to the dominant political framing in San Francisco political media, that of the “moderate” coalition (Daniel Lurie-led, pro-business, pro-reform, pro-housing) and the “progressive” one (Aaron Peskin-led, conservative, labor-backed, NIMBY).
This comes up whenever Scott Wiener makes national news, and commentators are confused by the hostility to Scott Wiener from pro-trans advocates, Democratic socialists, and other progressive activists. Shouldn’t they support one of the most left-leaning CA State Senators?
Here’s the thing they’re missing: local political coalitions combine differently, and the shape of the political horseshoe varies. In New York City, for example, Zohran Mamdani is indeed almost completely progressive. His few conservative positions include retaining NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch. But, crucially, the city’s pro-housing coalition, including Open New York, supported him, while many labor unions (who tend to oppose city government reform) supported the moderate Cuomo.
Conversely, in San Francisco, YIMBYs have aligned with tech and business interests in the “moderate” camp, while some labor unions and NIMBYs have joined the “progressive” side. Even the city’s actual Republicans, like Dede Wilsey, often find themselves aligned with “progressives” like Connie Chan over insisting on letting cars drive in JFK Promenade in Golden Gate Park. The result is that the supposed “progressive” coalition in the upcoming Congressional election is older, more likely to drive rather than take the bus, bike, or walk to work, and less likely to rent (vs own) their home. That doesn’t sound very progressive to me! Thanks Chris Arvin for creating the tool I used to pull that data.
SF political history and baggage notwithstanding, “progressive” literally means “characterized by continuous improvement or advancement; using, involving, or interested in new or modern ideas; supporting the promotion of the public good through government action,” according to Merriam-Webster. I humbly ask you, dear reader: which record is more progressive, that of Scott Wiener or Connie Chan?
Scott has accomplished:
Being the earliest and most powerful pro-housing legislator, including on a national stage. He passed SB 828 to get SF to plan for 80,000 new homes in 8 years, and also passed SB 35 and SB 423, which make it easier to get housing developments approved in California and have directly led to thousands of new homes.
Pro-LGBT, progressive activism, and not backing down despite receiving some horrible abuse from the right.
Pro-transit, including being a key figure in stabilizing BART and MUNI funding and keeping the systems running through and after the pandemic (SB 63 senate.ca.gov, SF Standard, MTC).
Supporting deregulating hallucinogenic drugs and letting bars and clubs continue selling alcohol until 4a, instead of the current 2a.
Meanwhile, Connie Chan is known for opposing turning JFK Drive into JFK Promenade; opposing Sunset Dunes park; opposing Geary BRT; and even opposing funding Caltrain back in 2020! That’s not very progressive!
San Francisco-based media and commentators: please be precise with your language. Connie Chan is the leftist candidate and the DSA-backed candidate, sure. But she is not “progressive” or “liberal.” She’s the conservative candidate. Scott Wiener is the progressive, liberal, and moderate candidate in the race for Congress — yes, all three.
I’ll close with some political ads that drive the point home:
Some political ads I made. Coming soon to a MUNI stop or post near you!