No Time To Stop Moving: Swinging Blue Dogs Left

by Jason Rosenbaum :: Filed Under Political Tactics :: August 10th, 2007 @ 6:55 pm EST

Coming off the FISA vote (which I’ve written about here and here), Matt Stoller is now working under the assumption that although the Democrats have control of Congress, we are essentially living under a conservative majority. And he’s right. We’ve got enough “democratic” representatives in Congress (44 Blue Dogs in the House, among others) who are willing to work with Bush on one level or another to pass conservative legislation. The Iraq capitulation and FISA betrayal can all be attributed to this conservative democratic “swing block.”

So while we may have thought we gained a check on Bush in 2006, we actually didn’t. What we gained was a more progressive Democratic Party, but we started from such a low base that the Republicans essentially can still govern. Now, holding the majority is nice for subpoena power, and that matters. But when you combine a conservative Senate, a Blue Dog swing block, and an extreme White House, you may have a situation similar to the Boll Weevil Democrats in the early 1980s and their working relationship with Reagan.

This is true. The Blue Dogs have shown that they are willing to vote with Bush. However, I have big problems with Matt’s conclusion because it mostly hinges on elections.

There are several paths to making [a real progressive majority] happen in the House.

Pick Up Safe Seats Progressives: This is what we are trying to do in Massachusetts 5th, where a reactionary Niki Tsongas is facing four other candidates, including progressive Jamie Eldridge. There’s also a primary in TN-09, Harold Ford’s old haunt.

Convert Reactionary Democrats: Both Al Wynn and Ellen Tauscher are good examples of how this can be done, and this is continuing against Daniel Lipinski, Al Wynn, and Henry Cuellar.

Beat Republicans: In 2006, Democrats picked up 30 seats in the House. Out of those pickups, 11 voted for the FISA expansion, and 19 didn’t.

Convert Republicans: I’m not sure how this is supposed to work. Americans Against the Escalation in Iraq is trying to crack Republicans, but this is very very difficult. Republicans have run right-wing primary challenges against dissidents for 30 years, since 1978. Countering that is extremely tough, though recent moves by the Mainstream Partnership could have effects.

Good long term strategy, sure, but except for #2, this essentially ties our hands until 2008. That is a big problem for the Democrats. Why? Because right now, America is under a basic assumption that the Democrats control Congress and that they have at least a significant say in Washington politics. People get incredibly angry when Congress capitulates to Bush on the important issues (such as Iraq) because they feel that the Democrats are actively working against their 2006 mandate. The conventional thinking goes that America voted for change in 2006, and now the people want it to see change actually happen. Don’t believe this is the case? Witness low congressional approval ratings.

The true test of leadership is not how you win elections, but what you do with power once you have it. If we sit on our hands until 2008, hoping to elect a true progressive majority, we’ve wasted two years and we’ve shown the American people that Democrats are ineffective leaders. Never mind that we really don’t have a majority as Matt argues, the perception is that the Democrats now have a voice. We’d better use it or we might lose pretty badly in 2008.

So where do you start? If the Blue Dogs are going to swing right on many issues, where can progressive ideas gain some leverage? One lever, as Matt alludes to and buhdydharma expounds on, is subpoena power. Controlling the Judiciary Committee is a powerful thing, and we can prove to the American people that we are looking out for their interests by stepping up our investigations against corrupt Bushies and strictly enforcing our subpoenas. Let’s even get an impeachment in there while we’re at it. (Gonzales, I’m looking at you!)

Second, some issues might be lost until 2008 (healthcare, immigration, energy), but there is one big lever that may help to swing a lot of Blue Dogs over to the progressive camp. The war in Iraq has as little support in Blue Dog states as it does in the rest of the nation. After some quick digging, here are some polls I came up with:

In California (Joe Baca, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, Loretta Sanchez, Adam Schiff, Mike Thompson), 73% of people (pdf) disagree with Bush’s handling of the situation in Iraq.
In Pennsylvania (Tim Holden, Patrick Murphy), another 73% dissaprove.
56% of Iowa (Leonard Boswell) Republican voters want a withdrawal in 6 months, along with 83% of Democrats.
In Georgia (John Barrow, Sanford Bishop, Jim Marshall, David Scott), 55% of people disapprove of the war effort.
67% of Floridians (Allen Boyd, Tim Mahoney) are against the war.
In Arkansas (Marion Berry, ), 53% of voters want out of Iraq.
51% of Arizona residents (Gabrielle Giffords) want to end the war.
In New York (Mike Arcuri, Kirsten Gillibrand, Steve Israel), 61% want the U.S. out of Iraq.
In Tennessee (Jim Cooper, Lincoln Davis, Bart Gordon, John Tanner), 66% dissaprove of Bush’s handling of the war and 57% oppose troop increases.

Already, 24 of the 44 Blue Dog Democrats are vulnerable to constituent pressure. Iraq is the biggest issue in America today, and one where constituents can be very vocal. I feel a great strategy to help move the Blue Dogs would be to begin now and begin with the voters. With congress on break, our elected officials are back in their home states, just waiting to hear from their loyal voters. If you live in a state with a Blue Dog representative, call them and give them hell over the war. Tell them you want a change from Bush’s failed strategy otherwise you’re going to vote for a real progressive in the primary in 2008.

Doing nothing until 2008 runs a serious risk of backfiring. If the country sees Democrats doing nothing with the little power they have been given, what is going to inspire voters to give them any more? Right now, we posses at least two powerful levers for which to move Congress left and start asserting power. I suggest we use them now and start the process of building a real progressive majority. If we’re not moving forward, we might as well be moving backwards.