Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

By present-day political commentary standards, LBJ's passing the Civil Rights Act would be a failure

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 07:52 PM
Original message
By present-day political commentary standards, LBJ's passing the Civil Rights Act would be a failure
Edited on Fri Mar-12-10 08:10 PM by Pirate Smile
A Historic Achievement

I don’t think the arguments mounted by Pat Caddell and Douglas Schoen that Democrats will face political disaster if they pass health reform hold water. Or, rather, I think they disingenuously fail to consider the alternative. If reform passes, Democrats will almost certainly lose a whole bunch of seats in November. But if reform fails, Democrats will also almost certainly lose a whole bunch of seats in November. At the margin, passing reform helps the party’s prospects in the midterms in my view, but the midterms outlook is just bad and there’s nothing to be done health care-wise at this point to change that.

A larger question any member of congress reading the op-ed ought to ask himself is “so what?” If reform passes and is signed into law, then immediately Barack Obama’s position in history is secured. When people look back from 2060 on the creation of the American welfare state, they’ll say that FDR, LBJ, and BHO were its main architects, with Roosevelt enshrining the principle of universal social insurance into law and Obama completing the initial promise of the New Deal. Members of congress who helped him do that will have a place in history. Nobody’s going to be very interested in a story like “Mike Ross served a bunch of years in Congress and people were impressed with his ability to win a relatively conservative district; he didn’t achieve very much and one day he wasn’t in Congress anymore.”

Which is just to say that nobody lasts in office forever, no congressional majority lasts forever, and no party controls the White House forever. But the measure of a political coalition isn’t how long it lasted, but what it achieved. From the tone of a lot of present-day political commentary you’d think that the big mistake Lyndon Johnson made during his tenure in the White House was that by passing the Civil Rights Act he wound up damaging the Democratic Party politically by opening the South up to the GOP. Back on planet normal, that’s the crowning achievement of his presidency.

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2010/03/a-historic-achievement.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Writer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. That's because we're leaving an era of competing political totalities...
where anything outside of a particular totality was considered a "failure."

It's an era that desperately needs to die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. Back then we never saw the sausage being made
& we had bigger majorities in Congress to boot. With the internet, everybody gets to post their opinion for others to see & comment on. Completely different world & it makes seeing the historical significance of this achievement more difficult.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 10:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Precisely Hugh..if one actually
wants to look at the whole picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. There was no 24/7 cable news channels or interent.
Even Bill Clinton had things a bit less scrutinized. There was no daily tracking poll until Obama became President. Things are much more intense today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MannyGoldstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Obama Was Able To Overcome Two-Thirds of Americans Wanting A Public Option
And force through mandates with zero public option - a choice that most Americans don't want.

In order to help his cherished Privileged Class, he labored mightily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinnie From Indy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. That is just nonsense!
I guess if one believes the final promise of the New Deal was to ultimately cement into law the blood dripping fangs of the for-profit, vampire-like health insurance companies and Big Pharma deeply into the financial arteries of all Americans, then yes - Obama will have completed the final promise of the New Deal.

In addition, I must have missed the part of the Civil Rights Act that mandated payments to private companies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 10:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. "Obama completing the initial promise of the New Deal"
... wow, never thought about it like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-12-10 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Neither did I- for good reason
The new deal wasn't about enriching and empowering abusive corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ncteechur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-13-10 06:59 PM
Response to Original message
8. Gee, let's look at the vote for the 1964 Civil Rights Act. LBJ had it easier and it wasn't easy.
The original House version:

* Southern Democrats: 7-87 (7%-93%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-10 (0%-100%)

* Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%-6%)
* Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%-15%)

The Senate version:

* Southern Democrats: 1-20 (5%-95%)
* Southern Republicans: 0-1 (0%-100%)
* Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%-2%)
* Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%-16%)

LBJ had it much easier because he the vote was split along the Mason-Dixon line rather than party line.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Yup. It was not as much about Repub or Dem back then but about north and south.
And thankfully the Northern Rethugs were much more reasonable back then as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
9. Folks these days don't know their history.......
so they rewrite it to suit them.

Everything seems perfect when looking at it from really, really far away!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
12. I wonder why LBJ didn't twist arms
and get Medicare for all? I mean if it were so easy to do....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Because in those days, insurance companies weren't as all-fired greedy
as they are today.

You never heard of people having to spend weeks battling them to get claims paid. There were no high-deductible plans. Even for the uninsured, medical bills were not astronomical, as they are today.

But there was a lot of talk about elderly people whose life savings were wiped out due to catastrophic illness.

That's why Medicare was instituted only for the elderly. In hindsight, it should have been extended to everyone, but the situation simply was not as bad as it is now, not by half. In fact, it wasn't this bad even twenty years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTLawGuy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. so a single payer system WASN'T better
Edited on Sun Mar-14-10 12:01 PM by CTLawGuy
back then? Why NOT just have medicare for everyone?

Something would have HAD to have been wrong with the system, even back THEN. Universal health care has been an issue since at least 1948.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #14
17. Yes, but it didn't seem as urgent to as many people
I was a teenager when Medicare was instituted, and access to medical care was just something that people took for granted. For one thing, most people had good insurance through their employers, especially those with union jobs (of which there were a lot more in those days).

Most people had affordable access. The tipping point came around ten or fifteen years ago. That's when I saw my own insurance bills skyrocket and began hearing other people complaining.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
15. 24/7 news has made everything into a big drama
Success/Failure, skyrocketing/plummeting, nothing can just be happening, it has to be the BIGGEST THING EVER!!!

Everything is "unprecedented."

I've gotten really jaded to it actually.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-10 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
16. Dk would want FULL civil rights or none
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC