The Washington Post covers the ‘Party of Hell No’ strategy:
…the barrage of “no” votes from the GOP has not abated. Emboldened by sagging approval ratings of the Democratic-controlled Congress, Republicans almost unanimously opposed a bill to overhaul the financial regulatory system that President Obama signed into law; they are against a measure to increase the disclosure of campaign spending by corporations; and they’ve largely eliminated the chance of passing a series of measures Democrats say could help the economy…
…Republicans say polls suggest that they can oppose all of these initiatives by casting them into a broader critique of Democrats increasing the size of government and the budget deficit, even if their bills are individually popular with the public.
“We’re very comfortable where we’re at; we have very few members who feel endangered,” said Rep. Tom Cole (Okla.), a veteran Republican and a deputy whip in the House. “We feel like we are reflecting a broader mood of dissatisfaction. Right now, the American people want us saying no.”
The Republicans are forever telling us what the American people want, but polling data paints a complicated picture that cannot be reduced to support for partisan gridlock and inaction on the economy, climate, Wall Street reform, health care, or aid to small businesses.
Republicans say they oppose the substance of nearly every proposal by Democrats or view the GOP alternatives as better. And party strategists argue that voters largely care about one issue this year: the unemployment rate.
Therefore, the number one job for Republicans is to keep the unemployment rate as high as possible, and even to delay or deny people unemployment insurance. It’s not hard to read between the lines.
The opposition has left Democrats fuming. They say Republicans complain that Congress should focus more on the economy but oppose every measure Democrats take up to create jobs. In the Democratic view, the GOP is cynically blocking measures to reduce unemployment so they ensure an angry electorate this fall who will want to vote out incumbents, most of whom are Democrats.
“They want to blame us for failing to get things done that they themselves have blocked us from getting done,” said Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
And, they’re dividing the left in the process, as their obstruction forces progressive legislation to be abandoned or watered down.
In the Senate, the Republicans, joining with a few conservative Democrats, have blocked measures that would offer summer jobs to teenagers, give aid to states to prevent layoffs of teachers and other state employees, and expand funding of Pell grants — arguing that all would raise the budget deficit.
Dulled enthusiasm on the left, coupled with rabid paranoid energy on the right, makes it hard to take credit for an amazing string of accomplishments.
“Legislative accomplishments and political popularity are very different things,” said Cole. “They are racking up victories, but they’re not building up political capital. We know we are going to win seats, they know they are going to lose seats.”
Anyone else sick of playing right into the Republicans’ hands?
Anyone else sick of playing right into the Republicans’ hands?
Why can Republicans threaten to take away committee chairs and the like if members go off the reservation(so to speak), but Democrats can’t do the same? Also, it is pretty hard to get people to understand why better stuff isn’t being done because of arcane Senate rules when your party has 59 or 60 Senators.
Because Democrats need votes and a threat like that would likely backfire. One has only to look at Blanche Lincoln’s and Ben Nelson’s response to negative ads sponsored by progressive organizations.
At this point hammering bold legislation day after day in the Senate makes a lot of sense even if it doesn’t pass. That should generate some good campaign footage of Republican contempt for their constituents. A large infrastructure and jobs bill would be a good candidate for this legislation, paid for with a tax increase on the wealthy and closing tax loopholes for corporations.
I’m always skeptical of the idea that the Congressional leadership should push legislation “day after day” even if it probably won’t pass. I do understand the emotional appeal of that approach. But if it doesn’t pass, one, obviously, it won’t have any positive policy effect on the nation. Two, I don’t know that using up lots of legislative time is worth it for the minimal amount of campaign footage you might get. Rememebr that most of the actual procedural motions and stuff in the Congress are not exactly action-packed – in fact, to most people and even most political junkies they’re boring as hell. How many people sit down and watch C-SPAN out of pleasure after all? So I’m skeptical we would get much of a visual/advertising/media advantage out of that approach.
Third, in the end, if Dems push bold legislation that’s bound to fail, the headline will still be “Dems Fail to Pass Legislation.” In my view, a better one would seem to be “Dems Succeed in Passing Limited, Scaled-Back Legislation.” That would seem to make more sense if you want to attract independent votes that see the Dems accomplishing stuff. But maybe you are thinking more of ways to rouse the progressive base. In that case though, why not push legislation that fulfills all the base’s pony dreams? Have Obama go out there and demand single payer, have Harry Reid try to bring a strong EFCA bill to the floor? What’s the difference if it’s going to fail anyway?
Do that to Ben Nelson, and he becomes a Republican.
It’s why I supported Obama in not stripping Joe Lieberman’s shit away. Lieberman knows that more than likely he will be gone the next election cycle. He’s a vengeful bastard, as we saw with health care. He would have joined the GOP right away.
And because the Democrats have vulnerable members serving in Republican-leaning seats and the Republicans largely do not. If we try to discipline moderates, there are a lot of them who will revolt. Who will revolt on the Republican side? And wake me up when Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe lose their committee chairs.
Yeah, the GOP won’t strip their chairs away. They’d be suicidal. Perhaps if the Tea Party had their way they’d lose them, but since when were they very smart in terms of political dynamics? When someone is getting 62% of the vote in their state in an election cycle with a popular Democratic President on the ticket…
Who will revolt on the Republican side?
You forget what the Republicans did to Arlen Specter when he chaired Judiciary?
They pushed Arlen around, but then Arlen was a pro-choice senator chairing a committee of the most anti-choice members of the GOP, and that committee got to decides on the confirmation of judges. Put a pro-lifer Dem in the chair of Judiciary and (wait!!) that would never happen in the first place.
Also, there is this:
“Desperation to pass a bill, regardless of its flaws, has made the White House and Congress subject to the worst political extortion and new, crippling concessions every day,”
from TGOS. That’s what steams people as well about this Congress.
It appears that the only thing that will wake up all of these fleeing independents and downtrodden progressives is another slap in the face with the reality of what the GOP will do once they have some more power in their hands. A real-life dose of the insanity of the GOP seems to be all that will convince them. I don’t think most of these independents, who are likely flush with a lot of low information voters, have the slightest clue as to how crazy these people are.
Once again, we will get what we deserve as a country come November.
Campaigning on “Yeah .. we are dysfunctional .. and have a few assholes in our midst .. but the other party is downright loony” is a winning strategy for getting the most people to the polls
Once you realize that the paradigm for Senate politics is professional wrestling then it all becomes clear.
I can’t agree w/ you more on the Republican Party w/ being effective. They view this as blood combat and w/ 30 yrs of winning(42’s triangulation was no more than Republican light and 44 is both too timid on most issues and a coward when it comes to matters of race and the economy).
While the Democratic Party is the only party to repeal the Republicans policy’s of disenfranchising the polity, the current leadership doesn’t have the stomach for the fight. After having its members spit on, its President called a a variety of socialist’s and race used to divide people it still issues statements calling the Republicans by friends across the aisle. until the Democrats realize and are prepared to fight a blood sport the Republicans are going to win.
As a slogan. It concedes the power of the Republican minority and for those of us whose memory is longer than 18 months, it contrasts nicely with the ineffectiveness of the Democratic minority.
What about “Party of Greed” or “Party of Failure” or “Party of Dubya”? Anything is better than the Party of No. Democrats as a party are lousy at being confrontational.