Jeff Madrick discusses the Occupy movement’s developing agenda and its exit strategy

Keith and Jeff Madrick, senior fellow at the Roosevelt Institute and author of “Age of Greed,” discuss the growth of the Occupy movement’s developing agenda, and the importance of a long-term exit strategy.

KEITH OLBERMANN: Obviously, the Occupy movement has the nation’s attention, to some degree at least. It’s spread to hundreds of cities across the country, thousands — tens of thousands probably — are already taking part in protests. The question of the movement now, how to turn that action in the streets into some sort of action on Capitol Hill? Even more simply — what can be changed? And with me for that, Jeff Madrick, senior fellow with the Roosevelt Institute and the author of “Age of Greed.” Good to see you again, Jeff.

JEFF MADRICK: Good to see you, Keith.

OLBERMANN: The Occupy movement has some sort of momentum that seems to be building by the day. It’s organized just enough to not be an organization.

MADRICK: Right.

OLBERMANN: But how does it use what is seemingly building now to actually change something? Once the formula is sort of played out, and they get the answers as to what they want changed, how does it happen?

MADRICK: Well, that is an unknown that we’ll have a hard time answering right now. I think we have to recognize, this has been something of a miracle in one week, as you’ve been reporting — dutifully — and thank you for that.

OLBERMANN: Of course.

MADRICK: Last Sunday, when we went down there, it was nothing like it is now. It’s a huge change in just one week. They’ve gathered a lot of support, as you’ve noted. I think now, they are seeking to develop a real agenda. But, it is that conflict. “Do we get organized? Do we tell our members what to think? Or do we ask our members what we’re thinking?”

And I am going to be speaking to some of them, and I want to here what they are most concerned about because that’s where the energy is going to come from. I have a clear agenda about what America should do, but then they’ve got to develop their own, I think, maybe with some advice from elders.

OLBERMANN: There’s plenty of people they are taking advice from now who would fit into this category as well, both of us included, I would think. Do you have concerns about this, from what you’ve seen? Things that might be, at this point, holding it back? Because I originally thought that the lack of the agenda, at this point, was a drawback, but I’m beginning to think it’s a positive. What sort of organizational or protest advice would you give them in that broader sense?

MADRICK: Well, I think it is a positive that there is no agenda, that they’re not telling people what to think. You know, in development economics, we learned — the World Bank learned and Washington has learned, a little bit anyway — that smaller countries have to own their policies. These people have to own their policies.

But having said that, I think they have to start thinking about an exit strategy of sorts — a declaration of victory. Maybe not next week, maybe not even next month, but some way to get out of the park and into Washington. I think they have to call politicians out. They need a list of principles, and they have to say — “Which of you actually agree with us and can we talk to? And who should we fight for in elections?” And organize nationally and maybe talk about coming back a few months down the road to see what’s happened.

OLBERMANN: Something like a large-scale march on Washington, perhaps? Something with a lot of optics and all the rest of that, plus meetings in the week up to it, or after it?

MADRICK: I think something like that — you know, that’s in what happened in the big protests, both over racial integration and the Vietnam War in the old days. It can happen again. They mobilized the support. But I do think they need some kind of set of principles or general agenda. Ask for something, and see what they get, and call these politicians out, because they — correctly — don’t trust them.

OLBERMANN: The local president of the TWU, Transport Workers Union, was in here, and he said they were being — their union was galvanized by what they saw, that they were awakened, and they thought — “Why weren’t we doing this two years ago?”

So, we know that the unions are benefitting from their association with Occupy. What about the other way around? Is it a benefit to have an established framework that comes with all the positives and the negatives of union politics or is it a negative?

MADRICK: I think they can learn from the unions. The unions have Congressional contacts. They can begin to make Congressional contacts. They can begin to see who they trust. They can talk about their issues. I think taxes on Wall Street will be an issue. I think health care should be an issue. I think mortgage relief has to be an issue in there.

OLBERMANN: Oh, boy, yeah.

MADRICK: And most of all, jobs. You know, I have to remind your viewers — once again — twentysomethings are suffering. It is very hard to get a job if you are in your twenties these days, and — when you get them — the salaries are down from what they used to be 10 years ago. It is a tough time for those kids, and they have every right to make demands on their Congresspeople and it maybe — maybe start focusing their abilities on generating some electoral support for some people they like. Not a bad way. That should be how our democracy works.

OLBERMANN: Right, and oddly enough, the student loans did not — the student mortgages — have not been lowered or delayed or anything while the jobs are not out there. Maybe that’s a good starting point.

MADRICK: Maybe.

OLBERMANN: Give us some sort of moratorium on the student loans.

MADRICK: Not a bad idea.

OLBERMANN: I think that might appeal to a lot of people in Zuccotti Park. Jeff Madrick of the Roosevelt Institute, the author of “The Age of Greed,” great thanks, have a great weekend as well.

MADRICK: Thank you, Keith, you, too.