I have a couple pieces of advice for Chris Bowers. He notes that almost every Democrat elected to Congress last year has chosen to join either the New Democrat or Blue Dog caucuses (or both). And few of them telegraphed their intention to do so prior to being elected. Now, my first recommendation is that those that raise money for candidates start including questions about caucus-joining along with the more typical questions about issues before deciding to endorse a candidate. Perhaps a pledge not to join the Blue Dog Coalition should be a prerequisite for support.
Second, this really should not come as a surprise, especially after our experience with the 2006 midterms where a bunch of northerners (Patrick Murphy, Michael Arcuri, Kristen Gillibrand) unexpectedly joined the Blue Dogs. The Progressive Caucus is so urban and so black/Hispanic that it is just not a natural fit for the kinds of members we’re picking up in formerly Republican suburbs. That leaves these new members with a choice between joining the New Democrats and/or Blue Dogs, and joining no caucus at all. Rep. Bruce Braley may have partially addressed this issue by creating the Populist Caucus late last year. The Populist Caucus has twenty-three members that come from all three of the other caucuses. Yet, I remain unconvinced that the Populist Caucus will emerge as a driver of progressive change.
What is needed is a new caucus that joins labor and the academic and urban progressive communities to reflect the common interests of the progressive movement. The Progressive Caucus as it currently exists cannot expand by more than a handful of seats, and that will only happen when an Al Wynn-type is replaced by a Donna Edwards-type, not by plugging in new Democrats from formerly Republican suburban seats.
New members are joining the Blue Dogs and (especially) the New Democrats because they don’t feel like they have anywhere else to go.
