If we’re to believe Democratic Party activists (now THERE’S an oxymoron), all we need to do is return a Democratic majority to Congress this coming November, and we will have change. The blog heelers at the Big Boy Blogs insist that voting for Republicans-in-donkey-clothing like Warner, Casey, Kaine and Webb, just to name a few, will enable the Democrats to take over committee chairmanships, to get subpoena power. Well, maybe not:
As the start of the fall campaign looms and House Democrats remain within realistic reach of reclaiming the majority, party leaders are beginning to explore the delicate question of what happens if they win.
Rusty from being out of power for 12 years, Democrats are rethinking how they should parcel out coveted committee chairmanships and the other plums that would come with House control at a time when the party’s potential chairmen are increasingly being portrayed by Republicans as liberal extremists.
In fund-raising appeals, on the Internet and in stump speeches, Republicans raise the specter of a Judiciary Committee headed by Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, a banking committee steered by Barney Frank of Massachusetts, a tax-writing committee led by Charles B. Rangel of New York, and an energy panel under the leadership of John D. Dingell of Michigan.
Democrats and others call it a tired scare tactic with more than a whiff of bigotry because Republicans often point to gay and black Democrats who would lead committees. But faced with the attacks and pent-up ambitions of rank-and-file lawmakers, Democratic leaders are hinting they might abandon party tradition and award sought-after slots not solely on the basis of seniority, but instead follow the Republican lead of also weighing such factors as legislative record, diversity and work for the good of the party.
“Seniority is a consideration, but merit of course must come first,” said Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, who has approved a review of party rules so Democrats are not left scrambling should they reach their political goal.
Somehow, I can see the knives being sharpened for John Conyers as we speak.
As former Republicans, now Democrats, take office, do we really expect them to support long-standing, actually liberal, office holders who have been fighting the Bush Administration (and often the Democratic Party leadership) while this country has run so hard to the right? REALLY? Isn’t it more likely that they will do what Reid, Schumer, Clinton and Emmanuel already do, which is to ape the Republicans:
Since winning the majority in 1994, Republicans have not hesitated to pass over senior lawmakers for chairmanships in favor of members more in tune with the leadership’s ideology or more assertive in fund-raising than their rivals.
Representative Joe L. Barton of Texas was handed the Energy and Commerce helm over more senior lawmakers, as was Representative Richard W. Pombo of California on the natural resources committee and Michael G. Oxley of Ohio on the Financial Services Committee.
Representative Jerry Lewis of California was picked to head the Appropriations Committee in 2005 over a more senior opponent after a fierce fund-raising contest that saw Mr. Lewis dole out more than $1.3 million in the Republican campaign effort in 2004.
As for Conyers, those sharpening the knives are whispering in the eager ears of New York Times reporters:
And some Democrats are nervous about the prospect of a Judiciary Committee led by Mr. Conyers, who has raised the prospect of impeaching President Bush, a notion that Ms. Pelosi has sought to bat down.
Anybody who thinks that someone like Conyers will get guaranteed support to unleash the power of Judiciary in today’s Washington is fooling themselves. The Democrats vote for war just as fervently as the Republicans, vote for the destruction of social services, vote for the expanding police state … they just want to be the new managers. Will people like this, so enriched by the current corrupt system, REALLY want the crimes of the last several years brought to light? They didn’t push for investigations after Iran-Contra, an earlier Constitutional crises which involved many of the same criminals involved in the current administration.
Whisper campaigns like this piece in the Times are just the beginning. As is true of so much that goes wrong in our country, the courtiers at the seat of power will often BRAG ahead of time about how they’re going to screw over the peasants.
Change will have to happen locally, and it will not be helped by rotating the asses who sit at the trough in DC, not right away. It will take a very long time … maybe we’re too far gone. Don’t fool yourself, though, that Republican-lite will be part of making that change happen.
In the new year, a new Congress will, even if the Democrats win, most likely be yet another Feast of Fools. After all, it is traditional for the procession to be led by an ass when beginning that celebration. We will all certainly be fools if we expect honest change to come out of it.
They will only change if we make them, and we can only make them if we REPLACE most of them. Until the American people are willing to do that, we will celebrate meaningless ceremonies before things go right back to status quo.
Since winning the majority in 1994, Republicans have not hesitated to pass over senior lawmakers for chairmanships in favor of members more in tune with the leadership’s ideology or more assertive in fund-raising than their rivals.
Makes sense to me – now money (read: corpratocracy) will not only determine elections, but leadership as well. Can you spell corruption?
and it becomes increasingly apparent with every step closer to a democratic majority why there was such a smackdown on him in 2003 and 2004 and again now, while he’s chair.
Dean’s whole premise has been ordinary Americans running for office, sitting on civic boards and commissions, volunteering on campaigns, and sending in small donations; $10, $20, $25, $50, $75, $100 whatever you can afford.
Take Back the country is more than a slogan. If more people devoted 5, 10, 20 hours a month to civic governance there’d be a lot more accountability at all levels of government and a much larger and broader pool of potential candidates.
And this premise is from a Doctor who went to Yale for his undergrad degree, served as a governor and local party officer and whose family name is the Dean in Dean Witter.
Maybe he knows something the rest of us don’t. 🙂
I’m so with you on this one north country. I still haven’t gotten over the Dem and media take-down of Dean. He spoke to and for me in a way NO OTHER politician ever has. And it wasn’t his policies. I actually disagreed with him on things that are important to me like gun control and the death penalty.
My support of him was because he empowered me and millions of others to get involved and really make a difference. I was asked to write my own letters and facilitate my own meet-up, I saw the campaign respond in real ways to suggestions on the Blog for America, and I knew that every time that bat went up on his website, my meager contributions would help us all match the hundreds of thousands that the Bush campaign would raise in a few hours.
It was a real living out of JFK’s challenge to “Ask not what your country can do for you – but what you can do for your country.” Our culture has become so “me-centered” and selfish that I think we’ve forgotten just what everyday people will do for others and sacrifice for the greater good if we only ask them.
Call me a pollyanna – but I think there is a power in that kind of partnership that our top-down leadership just isn’t even aware exits.
it makes me nervous, how much quieter Dean is about that now, and how much more he talks like the rest of them when he appears publically (see his recent comments on Israel’s latest war crimes).
I know he was never a liberal, always more of a centrist (going by his time as governor), but it seemed for a while that he got it. Now I worry that being inside might deflect him.
Then again, maybe he’s just laying low.
I agree Madman, some of his recent remarks are alarming, and I don’t know what to make of them.
What I also hear though, is that he is doing battle with Schumer and Emmanuel over his 50 state strategy – which I think continues his original commitment.
It might be that his is a more “populist” than “liberal” approach. Empowering people has is dangers – you never know what they’ll do with that power.
Maybe, but I find it hard to think that a Congress made up of leftists from Seattle, Mormons from Utah, auto workers from Detroit, daughters of migrant workers from Arizona and pensioners from Florida could be worse than corporatists from Seattle, corporatists from Utah, corporatists from Detroit, corporatists from Arizona and corporatists from Florida.
In truth we need to look at our fears. I think that whereever possible the two party system has a stranglehold on the nation, but if we loosened that hold we might find a lot of things would be possible. Ideas might start to flow, as negativity might be lost in a three or four way battle. Not saying it would, but it might. As it stands now, we only hear talking points from both parties and I am totally sick of them. I am totally sick of getting some phony survey from the dems asking me for money more than my opinion. I am tired of our country losing employment to overseas outsourcing and us getting to keep the telemarketing version of insanity. I am sick of corporate america and lobbyists holding our country hostage for greed.
well put.
Yes, absolutely. I’ve often said that when Republicans have good ideas, the Democrats should steal them. Now imagine what a plurality of ideas from numerous walks of life could bring. Why, it would look a lot like . . . like . . . democracy.
I think you’re both right. Dean’s has always been more of a populist than progressive message. Think back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries and the divisions there between Agarian populists and urban, educated progressives. I think there will always be a disconnect between some of his beliefs and policy prescriptions and more progressive activists.
Remember too, Dean’s an old-fashioned yankee, doctor, public servant and democrat first. That by it’s very nature will make him a little more conservative in his approach to things.
I also think he’s been lying low while he quietly fights the 50 state battle. I suspect we may lose some high profile fights this year, but pick up a lot of under the radar and off the beaten path seats.
On Israel, remember Gov. Dean’s wife is Jewish and that the need to protect and defend Israel as a homeland of last resort is very strong among much of the Jewish community, family, and friends.
Remember too how Dean got smacked down when he had the termerity to suggest that the US had to be an honest, unbiased broker between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
I think Dean is picking his battles. He (and others– it’s not just him) can’t transform the party in a year. It will take more time. The party, like other organizations, are change-resistant and will fight to the death to do things in the same way that they’ve always done them, knowing full well that it doesn’t pay to stay the same course.
It’s the devil you know, ya know.
Thing is, unlike other orgs or groups, they will have influence on what is or is not policy, which has an effect on how we will or how we will not live our lives.
So it gets back to picking your battles–the winnable ones that can bring about the most change in one shot. Turf battles that multi-task, if you will.
I know we don’t have a moment to waste, but it’s the reality. The Lieberman-like among us–those who are content to be declared “responsible” by the chattering classes, etc. than change our disastrous course on Iraq, health care, the economy, you name it–are very comfortable with the current system b/c it guarantees for them a place within it.
Dean becoming chair was the easy part. Changing the party structure into a more effective one; how it does business; controlling the diarrhea-of-the-mouth idiots who’d rather see Dems as a whole look badly or lose rather than not having having their place in the system (otherwise known as being content for the crumbs thrown from the big table) will take longer.
…”blog heelers” who have raised objections to the adoration that Warner, Webb and, to a much lesser extent, Casey have received are certainly aware of possibilities that Dems in charge will be only marginally better than when Dems aren’t in charge. When has that NOT been the case in the past 40 years? All one has to do is look at the unwillingness as recently as June for Democrats in appreciable numbers to back a withdrawal timetable, not to mention the Dems’ – and this means almost ALL of them – unwillingness to take the military option (including the nuclear military option) off the table regarding Iran.
So, some fiddling with committee leadership positions would be no surprise.
On the other hand, there is NO chance that without a Dem majority in the Senate there is a chance that diplomacy will become the preferred way for dealing with our neighbors on this planet. Or that surveillance will accord with the law, weak as that protection already is.
The alternative, a third party, or depending solely on action outside the party, is a guarantee of another two years, at least, of war, patriotic acts and destruction of the last shreds of the social safety net.
we are guaranteed of another two years plus w/ the Likud-owned, corporatist, warmongering, misogynist, homophobic and only-marginally-less-greedy-than-Republicans cadre running the Democratic Party. They are banging the agitprop war drums against Iran, along w/ Bush. They are eager to defend Israel’s war crimes against civilian populations in Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank. They do little to stop extremist judges (remember that Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a DEMOCRAT controlled Congress). They enable big money and the investor class at every turn while doing their best to undermine unions and worker activists. They care nothing for the systematic disenfranchisement of poor and minority voters (remember how hard they didn’t fight for every vote in ’00 & ’02 & ’04).
Time to face facts. They are wings of the same party, the Robber Baron Party. The GOP gives a home to those who are willing to own their greed, fear and racism. The Dems give cover to people with the same goals, but who don’t want to LOOK like they’re governed by greed, fear and racism.
The party needs to be utterly dismantled and rebuilt from within, or it needs to be replaced. Either will take time, and our slide to the Gilded Age is going to continue whether Hillary or McCain is killing Arabs in 3 years.
We’re looking at a decade or more, IF WE’RE LUCKY, if the leaders who emerge don’t end up like RFK or Wellstone. Electing the Reid/Schumer/Clinton/Emmanuel cabal to control will only be putting a finger bandage on a gaping wound. They aren’t willing, interested or able to start taking money back for the people and away from the Corporate Welfare State, let alone away from our imperialistic war machine.
Vote Green or another party where you are folks, because the Democrats aren’t on your side. Work with primary challengers if they’re available (Tasini is so much more a good candidate than the abominable Clinton). Here in WI this November, I’ll be voting for Rae Vogeler on the Green line for Senate. I encourage others to do the same if your Dem candidate in your district or state doesn’t share your values. Better to let them be wiped out so we can make a fresh start.
You answered my later comment with this I did not see this when I posted below asking what you would do in Va.
…be a majority party nationally, probably never in any state, and they’ll be lucky to elect more than a handful of Congresspeople, if that.
Eugene Debs spoke of one party with two heads in 1912, so this two-wings-of-one-party theme is not exactly new. And while there is some truth to it, it has gotten third parties exactly nowhere in nearly 100 years. Would have been great if Debs and his party had won, but he didn’t.
If ours were a parliamentary system, then I’d be working for and voting for a third party. Indeed, I was flirting with the Greens in California in 1998-2000 until it became clear they were going to expend most of their organizing energy at the national and statewide levels. Until they prove themselves at the municipal and perhaps county level, the Greens will continue to garner 2%-5% of the vote, unable to gain even a voice in national politics, much less any political clout.
You can’t “utterly dismantle” a party then rebuild it from within because it then has no within; you either rebuild it from within or abandon it. Abandoning it when there is no possibility that large numbers of Americans will choose another option will mean more than a decade in the wilderness. Rebuilding from within isn’t easy, especially when you’ve got people like Sens. Clinton, Biden, Bayh, et al. bending it to the right. But, practically speaking, it’s the only option.
I’m a Popular Front Dem. And I’m all for backing good, left primary candidates wherever they are running. I detest a lot of what the party has done in the 44 years I’ve worked to get good leftwing Democrats elected or reelected at the state and congressional level. I don’t like much of the party’s foreign policy ideas, and I’ve seen too much sliding in domestic policy. Which is why much of my time in those years has been devoted to activism outside party politics. In that activism is the only place real change can be prompted. Even there, it’s a hard slog.
“Time to face facts,” indeed. If you’re going to engage in electoral politics, third parties aren’t a reasonable option, they’re only a protest vote. Nothing wrong with protest votes. But presuming they presage a sea-change in American politics runs counter to the historical record.
Maybe they will, maybe they won’t. Maybe they’ll be absorbed by the Dems if they start getting enough votes to cost them elections.
As I’ve said several times, change is going to have to happen locally. It’s not going to happen nationally. However, I think enabling a party that serves only to ratify a manifestly unjust system is foolish. That’s my opinion. Other people need to follow their own conscience. However, if you give money or support or votes to someone like Casey, Webb, Warner, Kaine, Massa, Lieberman (oh, the list is so long) then you’ve got no right to bitch the next time they roll over on a judge. No right to complain when just enough of them cross the aisle to vote for the next equivalent of the bankruptcy bill. I don’t want to hear any bitching about vote trading “yes” and “no” votes to open up ANWAR in return for some local thing.
Those of you working from the inside will only succeed if there are enough people who abandon the party to weaken the Bayhs, Clintons et al. This is how EVERY major shift in the parties has happened throughout our history. This is how the neocons and theofascists took over the Republicans … they withheld votes, they ran far-right primary challenges, they voted for the Constitution or Libertarian party in important races. It doesn’t take that many voters.
Third parties are the only levers that people often have to change the major parties … or were the Bull Moose, Progressive, Farmer-Labor, and the various other populist parties completely lacking in any impact? You know the history. Would FDR EVER been able to build the New Deal coalition without that pressure being exerted from the outside?
You know all of this history. You know that the current Democratic Party leadership will lead us into the self-same wilderness that the Republicans will, only not quite as harshly. You know that they won’t pay attention until their jobs and access are threatened. THAT’S why they attack liberal activists so much … because they are just fine with the current corporate regime, with our imperial wars. YOU KNOW THIS.
You know the cliche about how insane people will keep doing the same thing expecting something different, right? Well, that sums up us suckers on the left who keep turning up for the Democrats, only to be betrayed by them again, abandoned by them again, used as convenient punching bags again.
You follow your conscience and I’ll follow mine. Your buddies can ban me from their little sandbox. You all can ban anybody that threatens kos’ cash flow and DH’s getting hired onto another campaign. Whatever, because when the tide turns, and it will eventually, it’s the collaborating party that pays first.
…from Daily Kos.
You and I completely agree on this:
As I’ve said several times, change is going to have to happen locally. It’s not going to happen nationally.
The problem I have seen with the Greens – particularly in California – is an unwillingness throughout most of the state since getting permanently on the ballot to concentrate on building local organizations. This is tough, precinct-by-precinct work. Instead, even in San Francisco, what we’ve got are campaigns for protest votes for governor, Senator, and the like. These will go nowhere until the Greens have a record of running a few cities and counties.
By the way, I would never give money or my time to any of those you have mentioned. And I’ve repeatedly challenged others at DKos (and elsewhere) who think they’ll make a huge difference, when, in fact, the best we can hope for is that they will block the worst of the worst Supreme Court nominees and maybe, maybe, maybe get the U.S. out of Iraq a bit sooner. One step at a time.
The cliche about people doing the same thing over and over again applies to a lot of third-party voters. They keep arguing for revolution and fail to get even reform. As for those three parties you mention, they had ten times more support percentagewise than the Greens or Citizens Party or Libertarians have ever had.
not saying that the third parties have been effective for many years, but that doesn’t mean that they couldn’t become effective. In any event, it doesn’t change my point about them being a tool for putting pressure on the party. It doesn’t change the fact that the current Republican party is what it is b/c people worked outside the party as well as inside of it.
Never said you banned people, but you seem very comfortable working w/ people who do. Never said we disagreed on a lot of things, but I and others notice that you serve to try to tamp down liberal voices who get fed up, a more like-minded voice that tries to cut off talk of refusing to dance to the party’s tune.
I, and many others on the left, swallowed our better judgement and worked hard for Kerry (worthless hack) and the party last time … again … only to be used as a scapegoat to explain yet another feckless “centrist” campaign run by corrupt, overly careful fools.
Those historical parties had bigger percentages for only one or two pivotal elections. That isn’t saying that the Greens or somebody else couldn’t in the future. It certainly doesn’t show that those votes for the Libertarians (or Russ Perot, for that matter) didn’t drive home to the Republicans that they belonged to the far right.
Do what you think is right. Advocate more of the same, if you think it’s right. I’m done w/ it. The only reason I vote D at all is that I’m lucky enough to be represented by Gwen Moore and Russ Feingold nationally. I will not be voting for the worthless Kohl this year. Others can do as they think best in their local races, but anybody who votes for Webb or Casey has no right to bitch about how much the Dems suck afterward.
What party offices did you run for before or after 2004? What happened? Did you get elected?
What reform candidates have you worked for since 2004?
so as a citizen, I ONLY have the right to say something, to DEMAND something, if I’ve run for something myself? Is that what you’re saying? Hmmm, kinda like only the lords or property owners can vote, is that your understanding of how our representative democracy works?
Interesting. Such a narrow view.
I am a US citizen. I pay my taxes. I support politicians who share my values as best I can. I’ve NEVER missed voting in an election since I reached voting age. I am a committed agnostic, and as such would have NO chance of getting elected to office in nearly every community in this country, if I was inclined to become a politician, which I am not.
I love the progression of pushbacks that come whenever somebody suggests rejecting the current political regime. First I’m accused of being naive, and not understanding real politick. Then I’m accused of being some kind of purist, or even a traitor or agent for the other party. If that fails then some self-righteous jerk like you will accusatorially demand to know what offices I’ve held or run for, as if only by those actions do I have a right to share political opinions. Sorry, but we don’t live in a fictional Heinlein-like Republic where only veterans or the landed classes can vote.
More and more people are going to see through the confidence game that the Democratic Party keeps running to deflect the people from fighting back against the corporate thieves who are plundering our country with useless wars and inequitable laws. More people are fed up with the financial elites in this allowing one of great cities to die so that they can make cheap land grabs. I’m not shutting up, nor are other people like me, and you will have to confront more and more of us as the blinders come off more and more pissed off voters. If you don’t confront and find a way to work with populist leftists, you will have to deal with right-wing demogogues led by the likes of Pat Buchanan and David Duke. Take your pick which populist movement you want to push people toward by continuing to work with the Democrats. Stressed out poor, working class and sinking middle class voters will eventually rise up. Would you rather wait until there is conflict in the streets?
I don’t HAVE to run for office to make my voice heard as a voter, no matter how inconvenient people like you find it.
Piss off.
Yes, thank you that’s it exactly MB! I was very sympathetic to the Greens until this last year (and still am in a few exceptional instances) but like you all I see is Greens jumping into high profile races (and taking Republican money or bribes from local developers) whenever they can rather than running for more local and non-partisan offices where they can build their credibility and build an organization that drives change.
Here in my city we have the first chance since god was a child to elect a democratic state senator. The republican incumbent is a real right winger totally out of step with this socially liberal/libertarian and fiscally conservative town. So what happens? A Green jumps into THAT race rather than run for a state house seat where no dem had declared at the time, or better yet, running for city council in a city with serious development and transportation issues and a mayor who wants to focus on local energy policy.
I used to think Greens could provide an innovative edge to democratic policies, now I see them as just as ego-driven and power hungry as the establishment wings of the two major parties.
Madman I agree there is a lot of Republican lite running as Dems. What would you do in the case of Allen against Webb(former card carrying republican) the choice here in Virginia? Who would you vote for in November? Would you protest and not vote or vote for Webb the former republican? Write-in? I will no doubt vote for Webb. No I don’t expect honest change but maybe I can stop an attack on Iran with that vote. Maybe I can send Allen the racist home. What would you do here given the shitty choices that we have? I always respect and enjoy your posts, especially when pertaining to religion a thorn in my side if there ever was one. What do I do and not feel like I’ve betrayed liberal values? Should I take this diary as a reality check and hold my nose as I vote or……?
I’d leave that ballot line blank. There is little or no difference between them. None.
I’m glad I don’t have to face your choice. I do know that Kohl, after so many terrible votes like the Bankruptcy “reform” bill, won’t be getting a vote from me here.
Follow your conscience. I know that I thought much as you do, as recently as Nov 04 … but I’ve come to accept the harsh reality.
I would still vote for the guy with the “D” behind his name. I don’t know for sure what I’ll get with the Democrats in power, but I know I can’t take any more of having the Republicans in charge. In this case, better the devil you don’t know than the devil you do. Worst case, if you are right about all this, is two years of More Of The Same, but without having to look at Santorum and Allen’s ugly mugs.
We at least have a slim hope of improvement with the Democrats back in power…but we have NO HOPE of improvement if the Republicans retain control, especially this current crop of Republicans.
I may be an optimist, but I hope that the Democrats might learn something from the Ballad of the Sad Incumbent (Lieberman’s loss), and realize that if it can happen to him, it can happen to them…
Get real. There isn’t going to be any major changes in how things get done in Washington “if” the Democrats take back the House or the Senate. Sure they’ll weigh in on such issues as flag burning and similar “do nothing or safe issues”. Real changes? Anyone who is counting on any substantial real change is going to be sadly disappointed.
The whole system is so badly out of whack that it’s going to take a sustained unwavering focused effort spanning 8 or more years to create substantial change.
This type of effort is political suicide for any politician who even attempts it since every single politician relies on the big money corporate contributor to buy the votes they need to get elected.
Government in America is a private enterprise that no longer requires the voters for anything but a seal of approval. That seal of approval comes with a high price tag for the any political whore willing to sell out the common good in favor of pure capitalism without any social responsibility to the common working man or woman.
Freedom, Justice and Truth is now directly related to exactly how much cash a person has available. Democracy is mall mythology for the ignorant brainwashed suckers who’s ego’s are massaged on a daily basis by the MSM.
Just shut up, be a good consumer and let whatever crop of revolving door lawyer/politician/expert worry about what’s important for America. Don’t worry they are so rich that they will always place the self interest of the chronically homeless drug addicted mentally impaired American before their best interest every moment of everyday. (Not!)
The only fools I see are the ones who like to think government in America has something to do with representing their best interest.
Democracy is a history’s best joke ever. America when viewed in this light has succeeded beyond anyone’s wildest dreams or nightmares depending solely on a person’s bank account and social standing.
Real change in the status quo? Keep buying the program. The Dem’s if they were really interested in real change would let the lunatics continue to run the loony bin until 2008. Instead if they win the House or Senate will just give the neo’s more fodder to blame them for everything they’ve wrecked or ruined in America for the 2008 elections.
So in winning 2006 the Dem’s will lose in 2008. Even if the Dem’s win in 2008 anyone believe for one second that they are going to repeal the imperial powers the executive branch has suckered Congress into giving it?