Blue Dogs Are Now Silver Foxes

We can do it! Change can happen if Congress does not ambush the movement. First, we must secure some strong leashes to hold back the Blue Dogs. They have just commandeered a five-year authorization for a $307 billion farm subsidy bill.

While the nation was appropriately preoccupied with the giant macro-concerns related to the nomination and election of a US president, this poisonous micro legislative maneuver authorized a cynical and costly looting of the treasury. At this moment the Blue Dog Coalition members have again demonstrated their mastery of the Washington maze that Barack Obama has pledged to change.

Beware! Change brigades are at risk. The massive veto override vote in support of this many-headed, power grabbing, tax-sucking monster Act exposes a deadly degree of malignant fuzzy mindedness among the majority Democrats. The title, conjured up from the best witch's brew of the advertising world: Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008 was step one in what will probably be the greatest swindle perpetrated on this once promising 110th Congress. More than two thirds of the members yielded to this hypnotic call of the wild and followed the Blue Dogs into the forest of financial fantasies and voodoo economics. The money appropriated for food stamps could be administered better by the Department of Health and Human Services; the funds allocated for conservation could be more effectively utilized by the Department of the Interior; and of course, there would be more food for the hungry throughout the world if the State Department was allowed to oversee the purchase of local food nearer to the sites of suffering.

In the hallways outside the offices of many Blue Dog members there are cute posters highlighting the dangers of escalating spending and debts. From many naïve Capitol visitors they win civic praise. Often they even capture accolades from fuzzy-minded House members who once scored high marks on their math SAT exams. Obsessed with the speeches of Reverend Wright and Senator Clinton's messages to white men, most members failed to review the arithmetic of the Blue Dog's enduring pork barrel system.

Since politics is the art of compromise, and the Blue Dog Coalition has seduced the most members into making substantial compromises, the Blue Dogs must be crowned as the champions of the House legislative process. Perhaps a new attempt should be made to reestablish an effective Urban Caucus to advocate subsidies to lower food prices in the cities. Or the urban poor should be allowed to adjust their "personal responsibility" assistance formula, not in order to be eligible for a 600 thousand dollar subsidy (possible for a farm couple), but at least a bit above the current six thousand dollar a year welfare allocation for a family of four.

Or perhaps the Progressive Caucus members who voted for the 307 billion dollar farm bill should study the style of the Blue Dogs and seek their set of compromises with these champions of duplicity who are stalwart supporters for a wasteful defense budget while at the same time their hallway posters preach fiscal accountability and restraint. The Blue Dogs who obsessively demonize welfare families have never demanded an investigation of the Pentagon's unaudited trillion-dollar sinkhole.

The second most powerful caucus in the House, the CBC, should carefully study the techniques and modus operandi of the foxy Blue Dogs. Year after year the Blue Dogs shovel billions of dollars to their small constituency of rich farmers concentrated in only twenty-one of the 435 congressional districts. The big cities and the big states, where most of the Blacks and the poor reside, have representatives who have brought home very meager resources since the demise of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society programs. Obviously the power to gain a fair share of the federal budget does not reside in numbers but in creative planning, dedication, and a relentless determination to prevail on behalf of a chosen constituency.

To match the Blue Dog Coalition poster marketing, more objective members of Congress should place posters in their hallways, which advocate meaningful change as follows:

Audit the Pentagon and use the savings to build schools

Discontinue the weapon systems that have failed in Iraq and Afghanistan and use the savings for youth employment programs

Limit farm subsidies to families with less than 200 thousand dollars in annual income and use the savings to fund child health care.

Accelerate the collection of outstanding farm home loan debts and use the funds collected to support affordable public housing.

Yes, the knights of change riding into Washington can do it. But only if they are vigilant against the Blue Dogs who hunt in the jungles of the capitol.

Comments

[certainot]

how about lets call the blue dogs "talk radio dogs" instead, because that is what rules the most active of their constituents. in red states and rural areas of the US talk radio rules politics. all the major AM stations are part of the coordinated GOP attack on the truth. and when important legislation comes up limbaugh and hannity and co make sure those talk radio dogs stay on the limbaugh leash. any of them who would think of leaving the yard merely needs a quick mention by name and their constituents will be frothing at the mouth until they one of the pols office staff a traitor on the phone, by the thousands. all these talk radio dems use the excuse they're doing their constituent's work but they're really doing the work of the liars and fools who are hanging on to the biggest soapbox in the country, getting daily coordinated talking points from the white house and their "think tanks".

lets call them talk radio dems.

[kellygrrrl]

or how about talk radio demons?

[timm0]

I can understand some people rallying to the aid of urban areas. However, before we ride out thru the suburbs (where our capitals of unsustainable lifestyles exist) to farm country to protest, let's take a breath and make sure we all understand the full picture.

I read Rep. Owens comment about "rich farmers." I know a lot of farmers. I know that none of them are "rich" by any financial measure. Bush made the same assertion about farmers and their 'soaring income' when he vetoed the farm bill. Now, as a solid rule of thumb, it's wise to reflexively oppose anything that boosh supports. If Rep. Owens is on the same page as that creep, I'm scratching my head and looking for facts to explain this oddity.

Yes, farmer income is rising, but go ahead and get some pricing on fuel, feed, and fertilizer before you conclude they are rich. Feed for livestock has doubled over the last 2 years. Fertilizer is predominantly derived from petroleum processing, so the cost for it has soared as well. Fuel... well, duh. Go to John Deere or Kubota's web sites and do some pricing of 60 - 90HP tractors - but think about how you'd factor that into your 'small business' budget - knowing that 100 acre+ farms often need more than one of them (plus attachments).

[timm0]

(continued)

The bottom line is that family farmers are getting crushed by sky-rocketing costs, farmer "income" has to offset those costs, and, regardless of our geographic location, driving farmers off their land and out of business is the only sure way to deprive everyone of a little commodity I like to call "food."

So if you and dubya have some more facts that refutes what I and any farmer knows, I'd truly love to hear it. If there are subsidies going to the mega-farms that are more like old southern plantations, let me hear about it and I'd be inclined to support some changes to the legislation. But please give us something more than Rep. Owens' well-intentioned, but incomplete, diatribe.

[Liberal2]

Oh my, another dimwit speakth! You don't know any "rich farmers" so they don't exist, eh?

As for income...you do know that income is what's left after deducting costs (fertilizer, etc.) from revenues (crop sales, etc.)?????

Stop commenting, you're embarrassing your parents and teachers.

Funny how farmers think unemployed city folk just need to find a job even if there's a recession.

[tdpubs]

It is the job of the representative to vote in accordance with the wishes of their district. The problem is that most people forget what representatives really do. If you want parity, the majority leader will need to lead.
Tom Delay and Bill Frist were bad guys, but they were strong leaders.
I think we need either Barbara Boxer as Senate Majority leader or Hillary Clinton. The house is run fairly well at this point, we just need a president who won't have to wait for orders from his vice president every time a bill comes to his desk.

[Marlyn]

"I think we need either Barbara Boxer as Senate Majority leader or Hillary Clinton." ???

BUT Hillary Clinton is a BLUE DOG!

[AlisonChaynz]

Bravo! Rep. Owens, I don't know who you are..... but I love you!

The farm subsidies and the DoD budgets are two of the biggest scams going. Stop the madness!

[robinhood2]

Obama voted for the most recent ethanol subsidies. Will he have the nerve to veto pork barrel spending when he takes over in 2009? I doubt it. Faith based initiatives will be out, but funding for inner city projects will be in. Pork barrel spending will survive. I bet the farm subsidies survive as well.

[clevelandchick]

Mr. Owens,

You have just joined my list of favorite politicos along with a poster here on this blog. Rep. Owens and BADEN, you rock. Copy, pasted, sent. Spread the word people.

CC

[Lemeritus]

FYI, senators ranked conserative to liberal:

Nelson -Neb.
Landrieu -La.
Pryor, Mark -Ark.
McCaskill -Mo.
Baucus -Mont.
Conrad -N.D.
MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN JOE LIEBERMAN
Dorgan -N.D.
Salazar -Colo.
Carper -Del.
Webb -Va.
Tester -Mont.
Bayh -Ind.
Lincoln -Ark.
Byrd -W.Va.
Rockefeller -W.Va.
Nelson -Fla.
Feinstein -Calif.
Casey -Pa.
Inouye -Hawaii
Bingaman -N.M.
Akaka -Hawaii
Kennedy -Mass.
Brown -Ohio
Levin -Mich.
Wyden -Ore.
Dodd -Conn.
Mikulski -Md.
Klobuchar -Minn
Kohl -Wis.
Kerry -Mass.
Cardin -Md.
Cantwell -Wash.
Stabenow -Mich.
Clinton -N.Y.
Schumer -N.Y.
Reed -R.I.
Durbin -Ill.
Murray -Wash.
Harkin -Iowa
Feingold -Wis.
Reid -Nev.
Boxer -Calif.
Leahy -Vt.
Lautenberg -N.J.
Menendez -N.J.
Biden -Del.
Whitehouse -R.I
Obama -Ill.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/cons.htm

[tdpubs]

Isn't it strange that back in 2004 they determined that John Kerry was the most liberal senator in Congress? Hmmm. If Hillary Clinton was the nominee would she be the one on the bottom of that list? Where is Bernie Saunders the socialist? Why is he not represented as the most liberal senator? For God sakes, he a socialist! The national journal sucks eggs.

[Marlyn]

The list is just Democratic Senators. Bernie Saunders is an Independent.

[BadChristian]

Right on, Major!

Fantastic post!

It's time for urban areas to to start uniting against the "Urban De-Funders."

[felix2]

I agree!
Thank you Rep. Owens for informing the public about some of the standard operating tactics that tend to blow taxpayer dollars on pet projects that become unassailable!

[BADEN]

So - NAME NAMES.
Congressman Mike Arcuri
New York

Congresswoman Melissa Bean
Illinois

Congressman Dan Boren
Oklahoma

Congressman Dennis Cardoza
California

Congressman Jim Cooper
Tennessee

Congressman Lincoln Davis
Tennessee

Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords
Arizona

Congresswoman Jane Harman
California, 36th District

Congressman Tim Holden
Pennsylvania

Congressman Tim Mahoney
Florida

Congressman Mike McIntyre
North Carolina

Congressman Dennis Moore
Kansas

Congressman Earl Pomeroy
North Dakota

Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez
California

Congressman Heath Shuler
North Carolina

Congressman Gene Taylor
Mississippi

Congressman Joe Baca
California

Congressman Marion Berry
Arkansas

Congressman Leonard Boswell
Iowa

Congressman Christopher Carney
Pennsylvania

Congressman Jim Costa
California

Congressman Joe Donnelly
Indiana

Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand
New York

Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin
South Dakota

Congressman Steve Israel
New York

Congressman Jim Marshall
Georgia

Congressman Charlie Melancon
Louisiana

Congressman Patrick Murphy
Pennsylvania

Congressman Mike Ross
Arkansas

Congressman Adam Schiff
California

Congressman Zack Space
Ohio

Congressman Mike Thompson
California

Congressman John Barrow
Georgia

Congressman Sanford Bishop
Georgia

Congressman Allen Boyd
Florida

Congressman Ben Chandler
Kentucky

Congressman Bud Cramer
Alabama

Congressman Brad Ellsworth
Indiana

Congressman Bart Gordon
Tennessee

Congressman Baron Hill
Indiana

Congressman Nick Lampson
Texas

Congressman Jim Matheson
Utah

Congressman Mike Michaud
Maine

Congressman Collin Peterson
Minnesota

Congressman John Salazar
Colorado

Congressman David Scott
Georgia

Congressman John Tanner
Tennessee

Congressman Charlie Wilson
Ohio

http://www.house.gov/ross/BlueDogs/Member%20Page.html

[Lemeritus]

Many thanks, Baden! These representatives often come from very conservative districts and vote accordingly. Nevertheless...

[Liberal2]

Ahhhh, but this why the democratic takeover of Congress wasn't much of a victory. If any.

As the vote of rightwing yahoos are more contolling than those of liberals and progressives this nation is doomed. And I really mean it. Look at approval of the initiatives of both parties. Rethugs have higher approval.

Example: Reagan versus Carter. Reagan was seen as more concerned with national defense. Why? Because he promised to build the B-1 bomber. Why did Carter cancel that program? Because he knew, but couldn't make public, the B-2 stealth bomber was entering production. Carter also cancelled production of the M-60 tank. Why? The M-1 was entering production. But the American Yahoo voter still believes democratics don't believe in a strong national defense.

The last time Yahoo voter Congressmen accepted coherent liberal and progressive initiatives was the Depression and WWII.

[MsLiz]

I knew Rep. Bud Cramer of Huntsville, Alabama, years ago, and he is the only Democrat who could have won in that district. He is not running for re-election and the Democratic party will be very fortunate if he is replaced by another Democrat.