Progressive House Caucus is larger than Blue Dogs or New Democrats.

[madfloridian]

There is so much stuff floating around these days about how the centrists won big, about how the Democrats must not be too bipartisan or anything like that.

John Nichols from The Nation puts it into perspective for us.

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?pid=139093

The largest ideological caucus in the new House Democratic majority will be the Congressional Progressive Caucus, with a membership that includes New York's Charles Rangel, Michigan's John Conyers, Massachusetts' Barney Frank and at least half the incoming chairs of House standing committees.

The caucus currently has 64 members -- up 14 since last year -- and its co-chairs, California Democrats Lynn Woolsey and Barbara Lee, say they expect that as many as eight incoming House Democrats will join the CPC. The number could actually go higher, as several candidates in undecided House races ran with strong progressive support. (The CPC worked with labor and progressive groups to assist a number of candidates in targeted races around the country this year, reflecting the more aggressive approach it has taken since the caucus was reorganized under the leadership of Lee and Woolsey and hired veteran labor and political organizer Bill Goold as a full-time staffer.)

The caucus will need an infusion of new members -- not because those associated with it lost elections Tuesday but because they won. CPC members Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Sherrod Brown of Ohio will be leaving the House to become U.S. Senators. Interestingly, the two members of the "Blue Dog" caucus who ran for the Senate, Hawaii's Ed Case and Tennessee's Harold Ford, both lost.

Then he compares it with the Blue Dogs and the New Dems. Let's look at what he shows us.

Do the math. While the Blue Dogs are predicting that the membership of their caucus may grow from 37 to 44 members, and the New Democrats hope their membership will edge up from the mid-forties to over the 50 mark, the Progressives are looking at the prospect that their caucus -- the most racially and regionally diverse ideological grouping in the Congress -- could number more than 70 members once the new House is seated. Forget the spin. Listen to Barbara Lee, whose habit of deviating from the conventional wisdom in order get things right is now well established, when she says of Tuesday's election results, "It is important to recognize that this was not just a vote against George Bush and the Republican Congress, it was a vote for a Democratic agenda that is rooted in progressive values."

[madfloridian]

1. I would not have posted this if not for Al From's column.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/696

Enough from him.

[madfloridian]

2. In These Times has an article about the Progressive caucus.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2914/

"This election was no victory for centrists
By Nick Burt and Joel Bleifuss

"We have a lot of work to do," says Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif), shown here at a Capitol Hill news conference on the Federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina in February. "Hurricane Katrina was a stark reminder of the failure of our government to address the challenges of inequality and poverty that still confront our nation."

Don’t buy all the crap coming from GOP talking-point memos or the blather from mainstream pundits. The midterm elections do not signal a move to the center. Yes, a few conservative Democrats were elected, but the big gainers were progressives. In particular, the Congressional Progressive Caucus is on the rise."

"No longer will Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) be able to grab the gavel and run, as he did at a hearing last year when faced with pointed questions from Congressional Democrats about the PATRIOT Act, Guantanamo and the “war on terror.” During a hearing, Sensenbrenner, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, used his standing to abruptly declare the committee’s public hearing on the PATRIOT Act over. He cut off the microphones of the Democratic half of the panel and smugly shuffled out of the room, thereby avoiding any more frivolous questions about “civil rights.”

Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich)—the new chair of the Judiciary Committee— will welcome such questions.

Democrats as a whole will benefit from controlling the House of Representatives, but yesterday’s victory bodes especially well for members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), a coalition of 63 left-leaning Democrats that includes Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Indeed the CPC is poised to increase its ranks. In an unprecedented move this fall, CPC members—coming together under the newly formed Progressive Majority Project—pooled their money, time and staff to lend support to progressives running in 12 House races. Eight of those CPC-backed candidates won, which makes all this talk about conservative Democrats in the ascendancy a bunch of bunk. (In addition, two CPC members, Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), have moved on to the Senate.)"

[UrbScotty]

3. Great to hear!

:thumbsup:

[madfloridian]

4. I can't get to the website at house.gov right now...

or I would post all the names. That part of the house.gov site must be down today.

[madfloridian]

19. Website if up again now.

But no new folks listed yet.

http://cpc.lee.house.gov/index.cfm?SectionID=4&ParentID=0&SectionTypeID=2&SectionTree=4

[onenote]

5. if my math is correct, a large a majority of Democratic members are not

members of the Progressive caucus (approx 160 out of 231 Democrats in Congress are NOT in the Progressive Caucus). And while I don't have a list of the Blue Dogs and New Dems and don't know whether there is overlap, those two groups (which arguably are closer aligned to each other than to the Progressive Caucus) arguably outnumber the Progressives. But most importantly, there are nearly as many Democrats in COngress who are not a member of any of these Caucuses as are members.

What this means of course is obvious: Democrats of all stripes are going to have to compromise and work together. No one group can make anything happen.

[madfloridian]

It also means....

that the other two need to stop announcing things that are not true.

That is my point. That is all I have heard since the election.

You can see the members of the other two groups by searching on the group name.

I think Nichols covered the numbers pretty well, though.

And here are the websites when they are back up and running.

Congressional Progressive Caucus:
http://cpc.lee.house.gov/

Democratic Working Women's Group:
http://democraticleader.house.gov/dwwg/

Congressional Caucus on Women's Issues:
http://www.womenspolicy.org/caucus/

[Cha]

9. That's exactly what that

means..I got your point!

Good ol' John Nichols from Madison, Wisconsin really knows how to Present his dose of Reality into the equation.

[madfloridian]

6. Duplicate. Deleted.

.

[madfloridian]

7. Don't you agree they should stop saying that?

That they should going around sounding like won the most?

I am all for working together, after we sort out what's true and what's not.

When we get the truth out there, then we can start working together.

[onenote]

8. I think all sides of the Democratic party should stop saying "their side" won

And they should all start saying that the Democratic Party won.

[madfloridian]

10. Agreed, but first we must have truth, not spin.

I notice very few are interested.

[onenote]

11. the truth is that all parts of the Democratic party won

There will be more Progressives, more Blue Dogs and more News Dems. Since they weren't running against each other, the whole idea that one group "won" and another didn't is a waste of time imo.

[madfloridian]

12. Not when the others are hollering they won it all.

Or is truth only important when it applies to progressives.

First we present truth, then we cooperate.

[Cha]

13. Have you seen this?

"Pelosi’s Ascendancy in House Puts a Close Liberal Ally in the Spotlight"

snip~

"Now one of the 10 most senior members of Congress, Mr. Miller has proven himself both a liberal lion — an early advocate of an increase in the minimum wage and a champion of the environment — and savvy about working both sides of the aisle. An agitator for higher teacher standards, he was one of the chief negotiators with President Bush on the No Child Left Behind legislation. (Mr. Bush nicknamed Mr. Miller, a burly and now white-haired former high school football player, Big George.)"

more~
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/25/us/politics/25miller.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[madfloridian]

14. No, but I will read it now.

I just discovered there is a Centrist Coalition as well, but I thought it was just a forum. Seems to be a group...checking it out now.

Also I was just thinking that Jim Davis isn't in the House anymore since his run for governor. He was one of the New Dem Coalition leaders. Betty Castor's daughter, Kethy Castor, won that seat. Don't know how she will caucus, if at all.

I was just thinking about that tonight. She is such a great person with great ideals. I think basically she will be her own person.

[madfloridian]

15. Mother Jones article...who really won the Pelosi/Murtha dust-up

I have a funny little feeling in my tummy this is right. We have two coalitions now giving lectures to the activists of the party that we must remain in the center and coopoerate with the other side.

Woof! Who really won the Hoyer/Murtha showdown

"If the Dems pin their hopes for a working coalition within the party on Blue Dogs, the Republican minority back bench will fiercely fight to convert them or win them as allies. In an open memorandum to House Republicans yesterday, Newt Gingrich, the former House Speaker, and organizer of the right wing during the early years of the Reagan era, urged Republicans to not "hide'' from their defeat, but instead get busy winning allies: "Our team lost. Begin to reorganize."

"From a House Republican standpoint, the center of gravity should be the 54 Blue Dog Democrats," Gingrich wrote. "If we and the Blue Dogs can find a handful of key things to work on together, we can almost certainly create a majority on the floor just as the Reagan Republicans and conservative Democrats did in 1981. Bipartisanship can be conservative and back bench rather than liberal and establishment leadership defined. What did the Blue Dogs promise to get elected? What was the nature of their coalition back home? They give us the best opportunity to create grassroots efforts to pass solid legislation. Remember, the liberals will find it very hard to write a budget acceptable to the grassroots that elected the Blue Dogs. We have real opportunities if we are creative."

Gingrich’s scenario may be going a bit too far, says Eric Wortman, a spokesman for the Blue Dog Caucus, but, "We will work with Republicans if that's the right thing to do."

Blue Dogs are sometimes confused with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, of which both Bill Clinton and Al Gore were leaders before ascending to the White House, and where Hillary Clinton is today ensconced. But there are key differences. The DLC tends to be liberal on social and cultural matters, but is dead-set against a return to New Deal-style social welfare legislation. Unlike the Blue Dogs, it has supported free trade."

I frankly am not really a liberal, more moderate than most here. But I am an activist, and I don't like the way my party has gone the lsst few years. I am tired of the lectures from the other Demccrats like I am not as good as they are.

[Countdown_3_2_1]

16. Centrists don't need to win big...

They only need to be big enough to give re-thugs the majority.

I fear for the progressive agenda in this congress.
I fear the war will not stop.
I fear we will have investigations and nothing more.

Somebody tell me I'm wrong. Slap some sense into me.

[madfloridian]

17. Nail on head.

That is all they need to do. That is how Bush got his agenda, everything he wanted, every judge, the war, the huge tax cuts for the very wealthy....

It was because there were just enough Democrats to give him his victory.

There is nothing wrong with being in the center when it is honestly defined.

These folks often are just using the words, when they are really selling out in the guise of centrism.

:hi:

[madfloridian]

18. Oh, and welcome to DU.

:hi:

[geek tragedy]

21. The progressive agenda was never going to be

enacted with a Republican President in power.

In November we had a victory, but there need to be more victories. A single election will not reverse all of the trends of history.

[geek tragedy]

20. And the Republicans outnumber all three.

Unless they work together as a team, that is.