Chuck Schumer is one of the big winners of this past election. Having presided over the last two Senate elections, he can call in chits from the fourteen new Democratic senators elected during that period. He will jump to the chairmanship of the Senate Rules Committee and he will continue as the Vice Chair of the Democratic Caucus (the number three position). Joshua Green has an excellent profile on Schumer’s rise to power in this month’s Atlantic. There is a lot in that article that is worthy of debate. What’s important is that Schumer’s vision is going to have a lot of influence over the next two years.
It would be incorrect to see Schumer’s philosophy as a reprise of the Democratic Leadership Council’s Third Way pro-corporate strategy. On the other hand, it would also be incorrect to see Schumer as pushing a traditionally progressive program. Schumer is not really ideological. He’s relentlessly strategic and practical. His goal is to create a new paradigm where the party focuses mainly on the aspirations of a struggling middle class in order to wed their goals to the goals of the poor rather than with the goals of the upper class and rich.
But, in order to do this, Schumer wants to regularly slap-down traditional liberal groups that advocate for the poor. In doing this, he isn’t interested in thwarting progressive policy so much as he is interested in convincing the middle class that the party’s policies are aimed at them and not at people lower down on the economic ladder. It’s optics and politics that are driving Schumer, but it’s part of a larger goal of passing progressive legislation on terms that will remain broadly popular.
It’s hard to argue against the effectiveness of Schumer’s Plan so far. But we should keep in mind that we’re entering a new phase with Democrats in control of everything. We’re also experiencing a economic downturn that will do more to cement the common interests of the middle class and the poor, as more of the former become members of the latter. The economic difficulties could be serendipitous for Schumer’s vision, as an increasing percentage of the electorate lives in the sweet spot where Schumer hopes to draw support.
In any case, the article is worth reading and debating because it spells out the paradigm which will be operative in the early stages of this Congress.
“Schumer is not really ideological. He’s relentlessly strategic and practical.”
“practical” is an interesting way to describe a man who heloped get Mukasey appointed, and then expressed “disappointment but not surprise” that the man stonewalled him on torture.
or when he came to daily kos and ran away after one question.
fuck him. I have no time for charles schumer and could care less what he thinks.
I still remember what he did to Pennsylvania. He’s no little-D democrat.
yes, he helped coronate the inept and bumbling Boob Casey.
Lordy is Boob a boob. Dumb as a bag of hammers, that one.
i thought schumer was the antichrist that would take over the dnc and make it dlc and dem lite if hillary became president
one by one those straw men are falling..
but we still hate mark penn right?
I don’t think he’s all that dumb, and he’s a pleasant enough person, but he had no interest in going to Washington until Schumer promised him a clear table and a wagonload of gold. And nagged, cajoled, and maybe threatened.
And Casey’s politics are well to the right of mine. I’d have preferred at least two of the other Democrats who were said to be running in the primary.
I’ve always thought of Schumer as a friend of Wall Street as well as a supporter of AIPAC. The thought that he would drive the agenda of the Democratic Party in the near future isn’t a cheery one for me.
from the article:
“More than any other Democrat in Congress, Schumer is responsible for his party’s gains over the past four years. “
first of all, chuckles is in the senate, not the congress.
Second, this pretty much glosses over Dean’s 50-state strategy.
in our bi-cameral Congress – the House and the Senate.
a much more appropriate adjective for schumer is ideologue, imo. his vision starts and ends with what’s good for him.
l don’t see his elevation as a positive thing, certainly not for progressives.
btw, what happened to chris dodd……………………<crickets>
well, Schumer does have some progressive chops; pro-choice, authored Assault Weapons Ban, supported the Brady Handgun Act, voted “no” regarding the bullshit effort to impeach Clinton, called for Bush lackey Alberto Gonzales to resign (for firing eight United States attorneys), led the bipartisan effort to stop the port deal with the UAE, etc.
the downside is he voted for the Iraq War Resolution, rants about the video game industry with his buddy Joe Lieberman, is a member of AIPAC, etc.
he started as a congressman in 1980, switched over to the senate in 1998, up for re-election in 2010. that’s thirty years in Washington.. he doesn’t appear to have gotten much done progressive-agenda wise. if I lived in his district, I wouldn’t be all that motivated to vote for him in 2010.
I think we need A LOT of new blood in the senate; Schumer’s been around too long.
The article sounds like centrist propaganda to me.
Schumer’s vision? Are we talking about that Schumer, the Senator from New York?
You’re kidding. What did they put in your New Years Eve drink?
“The economic difficulties could be serendipitous for Schumer’s vision, as an increasing percentage of the electorate lives in the sweet spot where Schumer hopes to draw support.
the sweet spot will be really the sour spot. definitely won’t be sweet.
And while we’re on the vision thing, how about a new Majority leader.
Reid really has to go. I’m like a cat with a hairball when I have to read this: via TPM
Gawd timid Harry: We, Us,..we WON.
Did the Rethugs ever reach out to us?