LAT: Party Conservatives May Carry the Win for Democrats

[DeepModem Mom]

Party Conservatives May Carry the Win for Democrats
By Janet Hook, Times Staff Writer
October 25, 2006

....Republicans are ringing alarms about what the House would be like if the GOP lost control: a throwback to the unreconstructed liberalism of big-government activism, tax increases and weak-kneed defense policy. They point with Halloween-season horror to the likely line-up of Democratic committee chairmen, including Rep. Henry A. Waxman, D-Calif., and other liberal old-timers.

But, like (Heath Shuler, a North Carolina Congressional candidate) many of the Democratic candidates most likely to be elected are cut from a different cloth. Sixteen of them have been endorsed by the Blue Dogs, a coalition of conservative Democrats. Several of them used to be Republicans. Shuler was recruited to run as a Republican a few years ago but opted not to.

With so many conservative-leaning candidates at the forefront of the Democratic effort, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has, at least for now, stuck to a minimalist agenda that steers clear of grand, liberal ambitions.

Instead, Democratic leaders are focusing -- and almost all serious Democratic candidates are campaigning on -- a limited agenda that includes raising the minimum wage, repealing tax breaks for oil companies, restoring college tuition tax breaks, cutting Medicare drug costs and other plans they believe could draw bipartisan support....

***

An influx of new blood from the Democrats' right wing could test party leaders' ability to maintain the remarkable unity they have forged during their years in the minority....

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-dems26oct26,0,6859332.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[aquart]

1. How much do they need to believe that?

[madfloridian]

2. Blue Dog leader says they won't give loyalty to either party...

or at least that is how I read this from The Hill.

For the Blue Dogs, their robust fundraising bolsters a viable political center in an ever more partisan Congress.

“There’s a group of Democrats who aren’t going to give their voting card to either leadership,” Tanner told The Hill in July.

Now isn't that nice? We are expected to vote for them, but they don't promise loyalty. BTW I think this is the main group that got the bankruptcy bill through.

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/092606/news4.html

"A number of prime Democratic pick-up opportunities involve conservative candidates the Blue Dogs have endorsed, making it nearly certain that the coalition will expand in the next Congress, perhaps dramatically. The Blue Dogs have endorsed former Reps. Ken Lucas (D-Ky.) and Baron Hill (D-Ind.), as well as Democratic challengers Brad Ellsworth (Ind.), Mike Weaver (Ky.), Heath Shuler (N.C.), Maxine Moul (Neb.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), John Cranley (Ohio) and Phil Kellam (Va.). In open seats, they are backing Christine Jennings (Fla.) and Charlie Wilson (Ohio).

Blue Dogs already constitute nearly one fifth of the 201 House Democrats, but they are outnumbered by the Congressional Progressive Caucus (64), the Congressional Black Caucus (43), and the New Democrats (42).

Some of those caucuses are likely to grow as well. The CBC has endorsed candidates Keith Ellison (Minn.), Angie Paccione (Colo.) and Les Miller (Fla.). The 11-member Congressional Asian and Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC) is backing candidates Tammy Duckworth (Ill.) and Mazie Hirono (Hawaii) through its work with the Asian American Action Fund."

I think this is the group who wants Steny Hoyer to take Pelosi's place. Correct me if I am wrong on that.

Interesting names on the list.

[pnwmom]

3. I'm not expecting much on legislation in the next two years.

For one thing, we'll probably only have the House. For another, Bush will be able to veto and we won't have to votes to override. So the legislation we pass isn't likely to warm many a DU'ers heart.

BUT we need to have control of committees to keep the really rotten legislation -- as in the Military Commissions Act -- from ever seeing the light of day. And in order to issue subpoenas, and to exercise oversight vis a vis the Executive branch. And to wrench the Constitution back out of Bush's filthy hands.

So it's critical that we gain a majority in the House at least. But not because we'll suddenly be able to enact all kinds of liberal legislation.

[arendt]

4. "...maintain the remarkable unity they have forged during their years in the minority...."

Right. Onlly if you call surrender unity.

Let's see: 75/25 split on the torture bill among the Senate Dems;
failure to fillibuster E-lito; Joe Lieberman and his phony "independent"
act including calls for his fellow Dems to join him in treason.

This kind of bullshit asssertion is why I can't stand even the so-called
"liberal" corporate media oultets like the LAT.

They are probably setting the stage for enabling the most conservative
elements of the Dems and trashing anyone in the center/left as "breaking
the unity" of the party. BUT, they give Holy Joe a free pass.

Donnez moi une break!

arendt

[Totally Committed]

5. That's because there ARE so few real Lefties running in our Party

these days. I've said it before and I'll say it again: This Party has been triangulated so far right by the DLC that true moderates look like radical Lefties now.

How totally f*cking and completely depressing.

This isn't my grandfather's Democratic Party anymore, for sure.

TC