Now that health care reform has passed the Democrats are arguing amongst themselves about how ambitious they should be in the remainder of this Congress. As Pelosi told the president during the health care debate, it’s probable that Obama has bigger majorities in this Congress than he will have in the next three. So, there is a certain logic to trying to pass the hardest stuff now. The hardest stuff is immigration reform and climate change legislation. Exhausted moderates are begging off such ambition this year and asking that the administration stay focused on jobs. In all honesty, both sides have a lot to bolster their arguments.
The first thing to keep in mind is that this is an election year. Not only is it an election year, but the Republicans have had a very good recruiting effort and are looking strong in a lot of head-to-head congressional matchups. There is no question that our moderate members in tough districts are at great risk of losing their seats. Any smart strategy needs to respect that fact and try to mitigate the potential damage. Yet, those marginal seats must serve some purpose, and what better purpose is there than to pass the hard stuff that won’t be possible at all with diminished majorities?
So, setting a course for the rest of this Congress is a real strategic and tactical challenge. The White House also has to consider their reelection effort in 2012. What do they want to debate and pass in 2012?
Here are my thoughts on some of the big ticket items.
I don’t think we can do both climate change and immigration reform this year without really wearing out the moderates and putting them at unnecessary risk. If I have to choose just one, I choose climate change. There are three main reasons for this. First, we need to show the world that we’re serious about climate change and can do something about it domestically because other nations are being asked to make their own tough decisions on the issue. Second, legislation has already passed the House, so half the work is done. And, third, immigration reform can be used as an effective wedge to solidify the latino vote in the 2012 election. The Republicans make such a racist spectacle of themselves whenever immigration is discussed that the Democrats reap huge rewards. Timing the debate for the next election year may be cynical, but it is also a deadly weapon.
Financial reforms should be worked on this spring and summer in the Senate (they have already passed the House) but the debate over final passage should wait until the fall, just before the midterms. The midterms should become a referendum on why the Republicans want to protect Wall Street against accountability and retain too-big-to-fail institutions.
The Senate is going to take up a Small Business bill after the Easter recess. That’s good. We need to keep rolling out small jobs bills in order to maintain the impression that we’re focused on the unemployment problem. When we focus on energy, or health care, or education, we can look like we’re out of touch and not concerned about people who are out of work. Rather than passing one big comprehensive jobs bill, it is better politically to pass three or four small bills that different members can take credit for. For example, Mary Landrieu will be pushing the Small Business bill.
I don’t know what the timing is on the Pentagon’s review of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, but that should be repealed if at all possible before the elections. Another base-boosting effort could be the Employee Free Choice Act in the best form that it can be passed (without card check, obviously).
I don’t think there are enough legislative days to do much more. But passing health care reform, financial services reform, and climate change legislation, plus the Employee Free Choice Act, several small jobs bills, and repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will mark an incredibly successful congress, and should have Democrats motivated to turn out to vote.
There is one other item that needs to be pursued and it relates to appointments. The Democrats need to build momentum for modifying the filibuster rule in the next Congress. To do that, they need a high profile fight. They could do this by putting forth a financial reform bill in the fall that the Republicans find objectionable and filibuster. Politically, that would be the best. But they can also do it over the backlog of appointments. The American people will be outraged at the prospect of a president entering his third year in office without having all his appointees confirmed into his government. One way or the other, there needs to be a mega-showdown over the Republicans’ obstruction before January, so that the Democrats are united in the belief that the filibuster must be modified and so the public agrees with them.
Any other items you think we should or can work on this year?