DLC and the Bankruptcy Bill

[Don1]

Was there a difference in how the DLC voted for the Bankruptcy Bill versus the rest of the Democrats in Congress?

In the House, 25 out of 38 DLC Dems voted for the bill with one not voting. That is 65.8% of DLC'ers that voted for it. Out of non-DLC'ers, 48 out of 160 voted for the bill. That is only 30.0%. So there was a difference there.

In the Senate, 12 out of 18 DLC'ers voted for the bill. That is 66.7%. Out of non-DLC'ers, 6 out of 25 voted for it. That is only 24%. So, there was a difference there, too.

So, yes, there was a significant difference between the way that the DLC voted and the way that the rest of the Dems voted for this bill. DLC'ers were more than twice as likely to vote for the Bankruptcy Bill!

House DLC rollcall:
B. Schiff, Adam, U.S. Representative, CA No
Baird, Brian, U.S. Representative, WA Yes
Berkley, Shelley, U.S. Representative, NV N/A
Capps, Lois, U.S. Representative, CA No
Carnahan, Russ, U.S. Representative, MO No
Case, Ed, U.S. Representative, HI Yes
Chandler, Ben, U.S. Representative, KY Yes
Crowley, Joseph, U.S. Representative, NY Yes
Davis, Artur, U.S. Representative, AL Yes
Davis, Jim, U.S. Representative, FL Yes
Davis, Susan, U.S. Representative, CA No
Emanuel, Rahm, U.S. Representative, IL No
Engel, Eliot, U.S. Representative, NY No
Etheridge, Bob, U.S. Representative, NC Yes
Ford, Harold, Jr. , U.S. Representative, TN Yes
Harman, Jane, U.S. Representative, CA Yes
Herseth, Stephanie, U.S. Representative, SD Yes
Higgins, Brian, U.S. Representative, NY Yes
Holt, Rush, U.S. Representative, NJ No
Hooley, Darlene, U.S. Representative, OR Yes
Inslee, Jay, U.S. Representative, WA No
Israel, Steve, U.S. Representative, NY Yes
Kind, Ron, U.S. Representative, WI Yes
Larsen, Rick, U.S. Representative, WA Yes
Larson, John, U.S. Representative, CT No
McCarthy, Carolyn, U.S. Representative, NY Yes
McIntyre, Mike, U.S. Representative, NC Yes
Meeks, Gregory, U.S. Representative, NY Yes
Millender-McDonald, Juanita, U.S. Representative, CA No
Moore, Dennis, U.S. Representative, KS Yes
Moran, Jim, U.S. Representative, VA Yes
Price, David, U.S. Representative, NC Yes
Sanchez, Loretta, U.S. Representative, CA No
Schwartz, Allyson, U.S. Representative, PA Yes
Scott, David, U.S. Representative, GA Yes
Smith, Adam, U.S. Representative, WA No
Tauscher, Ellen, U.S. Representative, CA Yes
Udall, Tom, U.S. Representative, NM No
Wu, David, U.S. Representative, OR Yes

Senate DLC rollcall:
Baucus, Max, U.S. Senator, MT Yea
Bayh, Evan, U.S. Senator, IN Yea
Cantwell, Maria, U.S. Senator, WA Nay
Carper, Tom, U.S. Senator, DE Yea
Clinton, Hillary, U.S. Senator, NY N/A
Conrad, Kent, U.S. Senator, ND Yea
Dodd, Christopher, U.S. Senator, CT Nay
Dorgan, Byron, U.S. Senator, ND Nay
Feinstein, Dianne, U.S. Senator, CA Nay
Johnson, Tim, U.S. Senator, SD Yea
Kerry, John, U.S. Senator, MA Nay
Kohl, Herb, U.S. Senator, WI Yea
Landrieu, Mary, U.S. Senator, LA Yea
Lieberman, Joe, U.S. Senator, CT Nay
Lincoln, Blanche, U.S. Senator, AR Yea
Nelson, Ben, U.S. Senator, NE Yea
Nelson, Bill, U.S. Senator, FL Yea
Pryor, Mark, U.S. Senator, AR Yea
Stabenow, Debbie, U.S. Senator, MI Yea

See also the following analyses on DLC votes.

DLC and the Patriot Act:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1961268

DLC and DSM:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1964058

DLC and CAFTA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1964233

[Mass]

1. So, go after those who voted for the Bill

You can draw the same conclusion when it comes to Senators from the South. So may be we should stop electing Senators from the South, who knows?

As for the Patriot Act, the Senate version was voted with NO opposition (it is substantially different from the House version). Should we out all of our senators.

Another question. Spitzer is a DLC. Should we vote against him as governor?

I tend to have major disagreements with many of the DLCers, but these stats are just a way to look in the wrong direction.

Baucus, Max, U.S. Senator, MT red state
Bayh, Evan, U.S. Senator, IN red state
Cantwell, Maria, U.S. Senator, WA blue state
Carper, Tom, U.S. Senator, DE MNBA
Clinton, Hillary, U.S. Senator, NY N/A
Conrad, Kent, U.S. Senator, ND red state
Dodd, Christopher, U.S. Senator, CT blue state
Dorgan, Byron, U.S. Senator, ND red state
Feinstein, Dianne, U.S. Senator, CA blue state
Johnson, Tim, U.S. Senator, SD red state
Kerry, John, U.S. Senator, MA blue state
Kohl, Herb, U.S. Senator, WI Kohl
Landrieu, Mary, U.S. Senator, LA red state
Lieberman, Joe, U.S. Senator, CT blue state
Lincoln, Blanche, U.S. Senator, AR red state
Nelson, Ben, U.S. Senator, NE red state
Nelson, Bill, U.S. Senator, FL Yea
Pryor, Mark, U.S. Senator, AR red state
Stabenow, Debbie, U.S. Senator, MI blue state

With the execption of Stabenow in the wrong direction and Dorgan in the right direction, the vote follows perfectly the pattern red states/blue states.

So basically, the question is back to: why do we not run more liberal senators and reps in the red states? And I agree this is a disturbing fact and probably a reason why we are losing more and more Southern States.

[Don1]

4. I cannot answer all your questions.

Some of them are good and some not good. I don't have time to comment.

Right now, I am just reporting facts. It is a fact that the DLC as a group votes differently than the non-DLC Dems in Congress.

It is a fact that it has made a difference in key bills, like CAFTA.

Democrats need to know about this.

[Mass]

7. They also need to know about a lot of things they dont know

I do not see that as a priority. I think by doing that, you are hiding your eyes behind the real problem: the move to the right of the Dems as a whole, and the fear of being seen as an opposition party (and this goes farther than the DLC).

[Edgewater_Joe]

2. How CAN We Kill The Demo LOSERS Council?????

There has to be a diplomatic (and by that I mean "using those tools," not "kill them nicely") way to do this ...

[Mass]

3. May be you can be intelligent and go after their leaders

rather than against three letters.

The DLCers tend to vote according to their states as much as other people. The problem is the direction given by From and Reed. When people will decide to attack them directly, I will be all with them.

But I cannot consciously go after Spitzer.

[Don1]

5. Not true.

"The DLCers tend to vote according to their states as much as other people."

This is not true.

[Mass]

9. This is perfectly true. but it disturbs your theory.

[Don1]

12. Nope.

I already checked the numbers when I did these analyses. DLC membership is a predictor of these votes much more than state.

You are wrong.

[Mass]

27. LOL

You have a war to fight. Go ahead. I could not care less.

During this time, I will fight for what is important. Issues!!

My only question: for who do you fight (300 posts, many of them dedicated to create a intra-party fight and little else and a deactivacted profile).

[Don1]

28. Issues are absolutely important.

Ultimately, that is what this is about. The DLC subverts the Democratic issues that we care about.

Please don't start ad hominem. I could easily accuse you of being in the DLC, but this type of attack is just not appropriate or allowed in this forum.

Stick to the issue. It is a fact that the DLC lost CAFTA for us. It is a fact that they vote differently. All I am doing is showing these facts.

[AntiCoup2K4]

29. Damn right it's not true.

My two senators voted for CAFTA. I expected Cantwell to do so, since she has a record of accomodating whatever corporatist bullshit comes through, but I expected better of Patty Murray. NOBODY that I know in Washington State was in favor of CAFTA. And as far as the bankruptcy bill goes, I'll be bringing that one up with Brian Baird next time I see him, but I know damn well that didn't represent the views of this congressional district.

For that matter, if the DLC is "neccessary to win red states" as their cheerleaders claim, then what the Hell are they doing trying to take over MY blue state, where they are neither needed or wanted?

[Mass]

30. Interestingly enough, Murray is not DLC.

So, may be your rep can tell you why this was voted this way, as I cannot figure it out.

[dsc]

31. She is a Senator not a Representative

[Mass]

32. Thanks, I know. I was answering to the previous post.

who speaks both of Cantwell, Murray, and his representative.

Sorry if this was not clear.

[Skwmom]

6. I don't believe the percentage of DLC members voting for a particular bill

really tells the true story. If the DLC knows they are going to be criticized for backing a certain bill, they can have just enough members vote yes for the bill to pass. A particular DLC member can then say to a corporate backer, "I would have voted for this bill but didn't need to because it was going to pass anyway." This will work if they are on the record voting for the corporate interests on other bills.

As clueless as they are on so many subjects, I'm sure even they (DLC members) have figured out they can just take turns casting unpopular votes.

[Don1]

8. I COMPLETELY Agree.

However, there will be a trace in that the DLC vote percent will be slightly higher than the non-DLC vote percent.

This is what I see sometimes. On key bills, the vote percent is significantly higher when it needs to be to get it passed.

They seem to be traitors to the Democratic values.

[Skwmom]

10. I think the DLC members suffered such a backlash from the bankruptcy

vote that they are now trying to be less obvious. However,I would think that a person needs to have enough pro-corporate votes on record to keep the corporate money flowing in to their campaign (which is why their is a higher DLC vote count on certain bills).

[Don1]

11. Well...

The corporations definitely called in some DLC favors to get CAFTA passed in the Senate. Check out that link from the op.

[Skwmom]

13. Thanks, I did.

The DLC is definitely the "Corporate Wing" of the Democratic Party.

[wyldwolf]

14. the Blue Dog Coalition voted 32 to 3 in favor of the bankruptcy bill

... and 10 of 41 in the Congressional Black Caucus voted for the bankruptcy bill. Close to 25%.. hmmm... The CBC MUST be dealt with!

[Don1]

15. The CBC voted about the same

as the rest of Congress once you remove the DLC. Read the statistics and be objective. 30% for non-DLC'ers. 25% for CBC.

Blue Dogs, on the other hand, sold out even more than the DLC for this one.

[wyldwolf]

16. that's only if your emphasis in on the DLC... But the fact remains ...

A quarter of the CBC voted for it.

[dsc]

17. which means, that unlike with the DLC, if only the black caucus

had voted, the bill would have gone down. The black caucus was better than the Democrats as a whole on this issue. (BTW if you really wish to make this argument you should try the estate tax where the numbers might actually work). Here they don't. The numbers are totally against your point. If the bankrupcy bill was all one cared about then one would work to elect blacks and throw out DLC members.

[dsc]

18. I would have editted but this deserves its own post

I am stupefied by your argument here. I have literally not seen in quite sometime such a silly argument. To argue that one should work against people 3/4 of whom voted with you if you work against people 2/3 of whom voted against you is totally absurd. If any of my students in Advanced Functions and Modeling (Alg 3) had made such an argument in a statistical analysis I would have been hard pressed to give them a passing grade.

[Don1]

19. Thanks for being rational.

You should check out the CAFTA link, too. The DLC clearly screwed over the people on that one.

[wyldwolf]

20. What argument are you "stupefied" with?

10 of 41 in the Congressional Black Caucus voted for the bankruptcy bill. Close to 25%.

That's a fact. It can't be argued.

[Don1]

21. I can answer that one easily.

You wrote, "The CBC MUST be dealt with!"

However, only 25% of the CBC voted in this fashion.

Wheras 30% of non-DLC Dems voted for the Bankruptcy bill. And 65.8% of the DLC voted for it. The DLC and the rest of Congress is far more culpable than the CBC.

So, people who get mathematics reading you write something like "The CBC MUST be dealth with" will often be stupefied.

[wyldwolf]

22. but you didn't

If the DLC as an organization must be dealt with for the votes of it's members, then logic dictates that the CBC be given the same treatment.

But anti-DLC rants are seldom based on logic anyway...

[dsc]

24. Yes and the votes of the CBC were 3 to 1 against the bankrupcy bill

so they should be heartedly congradulated.

[wyldwolf]

25. but still... 25%

Gotta punish them.

[dsc]

26. No because you are still gaining 3 for every 1 you lose

I tend to give money, when I give it at all, to candidates, but if I decided to give money to groups and my number one thing were the bankrupcy bill, then I would be writing checks to the CBC, that would be a no brainer. Unless there is some other caucus with an even better record than that. Of the groups mentioned in this thread, they were clearly the best.

[dsc]

23. That one would target a group that voted 3/4 with you

If all of Congress had voted the way those people did the bill wouldn't be law. Targetting the black caucus for defeat would be idiotic if one were try to defeat that bill. Christ Jesus, now we are down where I would have to give my 1A students an F.