In the long run, do you care if we have another Blue Dog in Congress or not? I don’t. I find it interesting that the unions are working so hard to help Scott Murphy win tomorrow’s special election in New York’s Twentieth District. With that much skin in the game for the unions, it would be a shame if Murphy lost. Maybe he’ll remember their support if he wins. But I wouldn’t bet on it. It’s nothing personal against Murphy. He seems like a good guy. But if he wants to be a Blue Dog, won’t he feel compelled to vote like one when it comes to matters of economic justice, etc? Not all Blue Dogs are completely in the bag to business, but they all seem to be at least half in the bag. We have a huge majority in Congress. Having one more Blue Dog looking to defend the interest’s of business doesn’t seem all that much better than having one more Republican from an at-risk district who will have to cross the aisle on a regular basis and provide a sheen of bipartisanship to House legislation. Tell me why I am wrong?
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
22 Comments
Recent Posts
- Day 14: Louisiana Senator Approvingly Compares Trump to Stalin
- Day 13: Elon Musk Flexes His Muscles
- Day 12: While Elon Musk Takes Over, We Podcast With Driftglass and Blue Gal
- Day 11: Harm of Fascist Regime’s Foreign Aid Freeze Comes Into View
- Day 10: The Fascist Regime Blames a Plane Crash on Nonwhite People
“In the long run, do you care if we have another Blue Dog in Congress or not? I don’t… Having one more Blue Dog looking to defend the interest’s of business doesn’t seem all that much better than having one more Republican from an at-risk district who will have to cross the aisle on a regular basis and provide a sheen of bipartisanship to House legislation. Tell me why I am wrong?”
then by definition you DO care, because you have said before that it is a shame the progressive caucus is too urban for many freshmen, and there’s no natural caucus for many of these newbies to go to. so the blue dogs bring ’em in.
maybe time to set up a new caucus or somethin’.
I like it when Democrats beat Republicans almost no matter who the candidates are. But, in some cases, I really don’t give a shit either way.
believe me, i know the feeling. I know the feeling VERY well.
Progressives seem to make the mistake of thinking the entire Democratic party is and should continue to reflect progressive values. But it isn’t, and doesn’t. It’s a mix from the left to the right.
I’ll take a Democrat, blue or otherwise, if they will vote Democrat most of the time. But I’ll actually get on the phone and work the streets for truly progressive candidates when they have a chance in my area.
The Blue Dog Democrats, while mostly ficsally conservative, sometimes to our detriment, they ARE Democrats, and generally vote to protect the environment, and to support other goals of our party.
So I won’t make the mistake of equating them to Republicans. But that doesn’t mean I’ll be their fans or work for their elections or re-elections, either.
the Blue Dogs are more of a threat to Obama’s agenda right now than House Republicans.
I disagree. I think the Republicans are an equal threat. And the Blue Dogs won’t oppose ALL of his agenda, whereas most Republicans will.
House Republicans are not a threat. Every single one of them is going to vote against the budget and it doesn’t matter. But Obama is pleading with Blue Dogs as we speak.
It is the Blue Dogs who empower the Republican vote when the Republicans vote along party lines and bring the Blue Dogs with them. Blue Dogs have never been part of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.
What do you really think the net result of one extremely right wing party and 1 slightly right wing party is going to result in anything like a balanced form of government? Economic progressives haven’t really gotten anything but a promise not to extend Bush’s tax cuts which were already scheduled to be phased out, and a whole lot of slaps in the face as Obama doesn’t just prioritize Wall Street over Main Street, but completely ignores Main Street altogether. Well, when they aren’t lying and telling us that TARP and the like are to get credit flowing when it was never intended to do anything of the sort.
For the Record, I intend to go out just to vote against Murphy. I’m sick of the Democratic shell-game where they say they can give us this, or that, and then when we get them what they claimed they needed, they pull the rug out from under us. Obama voting for FISA after saying he wouldn’t. Backing EFCA when they know it’ll fail, and then chickening out when they know it can pass.
To a whole lot of us Progressives, it looks like Lucy and the football and some of us are sick of helping you only to be spit on. The business wing is rigging every game.
maybe because of this?
even there, it’s a short-term win with prospects for a long-term loss if it causes the GOP to get its act together.
that’s a pretty big “if”
that party’s in total disarray. it’s very confusing for someone who came of political age with a ruthlessly efficient GOP. but it’s true. i don’t think the modern GOP can get its act together right now. anything it would need to do pisses off a critical constituent in their coalition.
I agree that the GOP can’t get their act together right now.
I guess what I am saying is this.
First, when we are talking about the House, vs. local/state/U.S. Senate, our biggest problem is the power of the Blue Dog caucus, not the power of the Republicans. Electing another Blue Dog will only make the situation worse, although the effect is slight enough not to matter a whole lot either way.
Second, if the GOP wins this election it won’t mean a whole lot, despite what everyone will say. They should win because they have a huge voter registration advantage. If winning convinces the GOP that they’re on the right track, it will prevent them from making needed adaptions and probably backfire on them in the long run. If they lose, they’ll have to reevaluate. And they may be incapable of reevaluating, but that’s the only chance they have for a swift comeback.
Booman,
i’m in the 20th District. Scott Murphy is a very bright progressive venture capitalist who invests in communities. Jim Tedisco is dumb as a stump, obnoxious, and incompetent. And he’s a certified Republican wingnut of the Bachman variety. Gillibrand was a Blue Dog also– but would we rather have a conservative Democrat like her or the odious and abusive Republican John Sweeney?
Who would better serve the interests of the Democratic Party in Congress when it comes to health care, the environment, Iraq, abortion, etc?
This is a no-brainer, for chrissakes….
Well I know you want to be represented by a Democrat and I understand. I’m represented by Gerlach and I’d strongly prefer a Democrat.
I’m just saying that the national impact is a wash.
It removes more Republican staff positions
Means local business goes to a Democrat for constituent services
Some positive positions
Scott applauded the bipartisan passage of an expansion of the successful State Children’s Health Insurance Program as an important step forward in making sure every American has access to health insurance.
Scott also supports federally-funded stem cell research. This research holds promise to provide cures to some of the most devastating diseases including childhood diabetes, Alzheimer’s, and Parkinson’s.
WTF do you want? We’re edging slowly back from the precipice. That’s a miracle.
I didn’t know you lived in PA-06 … glad to know I am not the only one … now I know that you can run in ’10 😉
Booman wrote:
“House Republicans are not a threat. Every single one of them is going to vote against the budget and it doesn’t matter. But Obama is pleading with Blue Dogs as we speak.”
OK, let’s assume that’s true. Are we better off with more obstructionist Republicans in the House, or conservative Democrats who are with us on most important issues and at least persuadable on others?
Whether you like it or not, this is the first verdict on the Obama presidency.
If D wins, Obama gains capital, and has more leverage.
If R wins, Obama loses capital.
Regardless of your opinion of Obama, it is better for him to have more capital.
While I can’t summon much enthusiasm for another Blue Dog, it is worth noting that in most of the remaining Republican districts, Democrats can win if and only if their candidate is a Blue Dog.
That would be nothing to get excited about, even if a right wing candidate is marginally better than a right wing nut candidate, but for the fact that when a district has grown comfortable with their Blue Dog, it has essentially moved a little to the left, and the next Democrat to take it might actually be a progressive.
In any case, we are not going to undo an extreme thirty-year swing to the right in only a couple of election cycles. By the time American liberalism reaches its next zenith, you and I will be old men. We ultimately fight for the future, because our time is already past.
So yes, if a little unexciting victory here and there eventually leads to my teenage daughter reaching middle age in a free, fair, and egalitarian society, I can muster at least a little enthusiasm for it.
We have a huge majority in Congress.
terrific.. so that means there will be NO problem
passing EFCA and single payer health care, right??
In some ways Blue Dogs are insidious, being reactionaries within the party. Bill Clinton is a good example in that he pushed or allowed all sorts of reactionary legislation to pass. Often the Dems in Congress were way to the left of Bill. At the end of the day the working class was worse off. And much of it was done with the Democratic imprimatur.
On the other hand, if you are a Democrat you are beholden to your constituency. If you don’t deliver to the unions (or other groups) active in your election, and in your fund-raising, you may not get reelected. Or even renominated.
In elections where Blue Dogs are running under the “D” that’s a good time to take a good look at the Green Party candidate and other third-party candidates.