Time to Dog the Dogs

Who stands in the way of the reforms vital to get us out of the deep hole we are in?

Republicans, of course, have decided to be the party of "no," staking their future on Obama's failure. But that isn't a surprise.

The entrenched interests whose oxen get gored are suitably enraged, and mobilizing million dollar lobby efforts - Big Oil, Big Pharma, insurance companies, agribusiness, global corporations, Wall Street. But we knew that was coming.

The timidity of conventional wisdom - particularly in dealing with the Wall Street banksters - has delayed the necessary restructuring of the insolvent banks. As the AIG bonus scandal suggests, the president's economic team may well be shooting itself in the knee.

But the most treacherous opposition comes from within the Democratic Party itself, from so-called "moderate" and conservative Democrats, particularly the Blue Dogs in the House and their cousins in the Senate who are working to block the changes that we need. House Blue Dogs threaten constantly to join with Republicans to cut vital investments and limit basic reforms. New Dems ingloriously worked for banks in weakening judges ability to adjust mortgages in bankruptcy. But it is in the Senate, where the opposition is most damaging. Consider:

It was Ben Nelson, a conservative Democrat from Nebraska, who gave Republicans their legs in weakening the vital stimulus package. Joining with the Maine Republican Senators, Nelson succeeded in reducing the size of the stimulus package and in cutting investment to support more tax cuts, particularly the egregious "fix" of the alternative minimum tax that goes to high end earners and is least effective in generating jobs. Nelson not only turned on the president's plan, he made it much weaker.

Now Evan Bayh, the Ken doll handsome Senator from Indiana, has joined with Tom Carper of Delaware and Blanche Lincoln to organize the equivalent of a Blue Dog group in the Senate. Bayh objects to early reports that described them as working to obstruct the president's reforms and water down his budget, arguing "we're not a counterweight to anybody. We're not here to obstruct anything. We're here to help get to 60 votes," referencing the threshold that's needed to overcome filibusters.

Exactly. That is the threat that enables them to obstruct the president's reforms and water down his budget. Bayh and his colleagues have joined with Republicans to insist that the president gain a super-majority of 60 to pass any of his major reforms. Bayh joined with others to warn the president not to use existing budget rules that require only a simple majority of 51 votes to pass either his clean energy or his health care reforms. The rules around what are called reconciliation bills are one procedure in the Senate wherein majority rule still governs, because filibusters are not allowed. On all other major votes, Republican obstruction promises a filibuster that requires 60 votes to overcome. Not surprisingly, major changes often are packed into reconciliation bills. That is how, for example, Reagan and Bush got their top end tax cuts passed. Bayh is joining with other conservative Senators to deprive Obama of the very means he needs to pass his major reforms.

The president isn't omniscient, so I for one don't expect Democrats to line up to support his every move. Certainly, he would be well served if opposition to his failed banking plan grows.

But Evan Bayh and his Blue Dog Senators haven't exactly earned trust for their judgment. Bayh, for example, was a leading supporter of making war on Iraq. He joined with the noxious Joe Lieberman in casting the most votes against the president during the stimulus fight. He recently penned a truly bizarre editorial in the Wall Street Journal calling on the president to veto the final appropriations for this fiscal year.

In the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, with the economy hemorrhaging jobs, Bayh argued that the appropriation bill was too big and spent too much money. "Families and businesses are tightening their belts to make ends meet -- and Washington should too.' "Spending," the Senator argues, " should be held in check before taxes are raised, even on the wealthy."

Now listen, folks, this is elemental. The economy is collapsing. Having lost some $13 trillion in household and stock market wealth, consumers are tightening their belts. Businesses are cutting back and laying off workers. Export markets have collapsed. States and localities are facing serious layoffs. The only thing lifting this economy is deficit spending by the federal government. It is at this time that the federal government must loosen its belt, not tighten it. Republicans won't admit that. Bayh clearly doesn't get it.

The new Senate Blue Dogs claim, of course, to be high minded advocates of "fiscal responsibility." But this is often a cover for more parochial concerns. Nelson objects to the Obama budget because it calls for moving to direct lending for student loans, saving billions in subsidies to banks and using that money to pay for increased grant aid. Nelnet, a leading student lender, will be hit badly by the change. Its headquarters happen to be in Nebraska.

Kent Conrad argues piously that the deficits are too high, but that doesn't stop him for opposing Obama's call to save billions by paring the wasteful subsidies that go to agribusiness, leading contributors to Conrad's campaign coffers.

Thus far, these Senate wannabe Blue Dogs have done a lot of barking, while threatening to trip up the reforms we need. What they really need is a little discipline. We can't put them on a leash. But at the very least, we could tell them to behave. Why not let them know directly that we don't appreciate their standing in the way? It is time to start dogging the dogs.

The Campaign for America's Future has decided to make this easy. Go to ourfuture.org. We provide a list of the Blue Dogs in the House and the leaders of would be Blue Dogs in the Senate. Pick one, and help instruct them by phone or email. It's time to dog the dogs.

Comments

[nordstrom]

Let the Blue Dawgs know how you feel:

Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.) 202-224-5623

Sen. Blanche Lincoln (Ark.) 202-224-4843

Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.) 202-224-6551

Sen. Kent Conrad (ND) 202-224-2043

Sen. Michael Bennet (CO) 202-224-5852

Sen. Mark Begich (Alaska) 202-224-3004

Sen. Herb Kohl (WI) 202-224-5653

Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) 202-224-4041

Sen. Claire McCaskill (MO) 202-224-6154

Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.) 202-224-5274

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (NH) 202-224-2841

Sen. Mark Udall (CO) 202-224-5941

Sen. Mark Warner (Va.) 202-224-2023

Sen. Kay Hagan (NC) 202-224-6342

Sen. Tom Carper (Del.) 202-228-2190

[PoliticalAnimal]

Lapdog Democrats enabled every pork-laden Bush budget for eight years. They voted in lockstep for every military budget (read Cheney slush fund), and sent troops into battle without sufficient armor or equipment to do their jobs. They betrayed their Oath to protect and defend the Constitution - their ONLY sworn duty - and allied themselves with the enemies our President is now at war with ...

Are they traitors at a time of war? Perhaps not.

BUT THEY ARE CLOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!

[chharriett]

Democrats in Name Only MUST BE DRIVEN OUT of Congress! Act Blue is the group that raises funds for progressive Dem candidates. Please donate!

[dsws]

To have a majority, you need the center. The center will always be where the balance of real power is. If liberals, progressives, and moderates could get together behind an organization that would take names and make donations in selected primary and general campaigns -- and put as much money and time into it as we did into the Obama campaign -- the center would be in a very different place. And that's where the yellow streaks and dead armadillos would scurry to.

[Pablo175]

Let's spend, spend, spend. Yipee. Give me more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[paixa3]

Robert, thank you for the spot on analysis. BLUE DOGS have to go, as do rethuglicants and many, if not all DLC types as well.

[petey64]

yes go after those conservative Dems and put in very left leaning Dems, that will work, those people were elected in those areas because the people in those areas are more conservative and they will pick a Republican over a very left leaning Dem every time.....so go ahead make your move.

[Robert L. Borosage - Huffpost Blogger]

As I noted, I haven't called for rolling out the trumbels against these folks, rather simply letting them hear from us.

But comments that see politics as linear -- left, right -- and static are simply wrong-headed. In the midst of this economic crisis, it is quite easy to imagine a populist candidate -- perhaps one conservative on social issues but quite populist on economics -- running very well in conservative Southern districts against both a blue dog democrat standing with the banks rather than the homeowners, or a Republican still wedded to market fundamentalism.

For years in many of our conservative districts, social issues and national security trumped economics, and neither Democrats nor Republicans were particularly convincing on kitchen table economics. Now economic fears are paramount and populist candidates may well find openings in districts considered "more conservative."

[Benton]

Unfortunately all politicians in Washington are to the right of the American people.

[NCIndependant]

Actually I voted for a DINO because the only alternative was a far far worse Republican candidate.
I blame the Democratic party for not giving us a better choice in the past two elections. I have written to the local Party in protest, asking them to provide us an actual Democrat, but we seem to be stuck with this guy for now. The funny thing is, though we are a state that barely went blue, my part of the state would vote for an actual Democrat, but the Party is still too scared to run one. So we get DINO.

[UACatsRWings]

The public and voters should blame the "blue dogs" and Evan Bayh if the economy does not get back on track. If they side with the Republicans to stop all that President Obama plans to achieve with his budget and fixing what the GOP and President Bush's Administration left behind financially. Evan Bayh and the rest of the "blue dog" Democrats deserve to lose their senate seats. The Democrats finally got in the position to fix the mess left behind by the GOP, but now we have Democrats that are more worried about saving their Senate seat than helping the Obama Administration take care of the financial mess left by Bush.. Don;t the "blue dong Democrats" realize that the would be part of the problem if this economy goes further "south".

[interventor]

Sure, alienate those within the Democrat party, just because they won't always toady to your demands. Sounds like someone who has no idea how politics really works. Great recipe to return the Republicans to power in two years.

[paixa3]

The rethuglicants will be back anyway. America is getting rather pi$$ed off at giving money to banks, wall street and AIG.

Giving money away is NO solution to the economic problems the USA has.

[Robert L. Borosage - Huffpost Blogger]

You got this upside down. It is blue dogs standing in the way of the President's reforms that will "alienate those within the Democratic Party." And it is Senators and Reps who protect entrenched corporate interests in a time of change that have the recipe that might well allow Republicans to pose as faux populists and make gains in two years.

If Democrats stood together and passed the Obama plan, they would look a hell of a lot stronger than if they scatter, the Blue Dogs join with Rs to block major elements, the economy continues to get worse, and Ds don't produce.

[Christian]

Maybe we could learn something from the Hammer when he ran the republicans. Discipline was laid down and they all got behind the program. Democrats could learn something from him.

[RJII]

BOOOOOOOO to these 15 moderate dems.

We need to support the President with constructive opinion, NOT organized descent and obstruction. And why are you on TV with this descent.

I'm an independent now who says we need to support the president as he takes the hard steps of trying to fix America's enormous messes.

It can't be done in two months. Two years at best. We have to learn, work hard and strive to fix decades of greed, useless wars and mismanagement.

Dems like this should not splinter into special groups. You are going to send us back to a republican majority-- back to the 20th century where the republicans are happliy settled.

[Bardmess]

It's time-consuming, but how about all Democrats send weekly reminders to the Blue Dogs that we elected Democrats, not pseudo democrats...

and work with organizations like MoveOn to replace them with real democrats if they fail to adapt.

[paixa3]

"""""not pseudo democrats...""""" rethuglicants. There, I fixed it for you.

[OpalSky42]

I clicked on the link - I was born in Indiana and to my chagrin, two of the blue dogs are from IN. Jerks!

[peacegurl48]

No wonder people become Independents! We have a chance to move beyond ideology and partisan obsession and take the country in a better direction.­..restorin­g goevernment for the people.
Some days it is very hard to maintain hope. The greed factor is a powerful force against substantive change.

[zjr909]

Every two years, all registered voters should unplug their TV's: see no ads; hear no debates; speak no slogans. All we're getting from the TV is vapid platitudes and self-serving half-truths. We should ignore even the quotes attributed to the candidates and only attend to what's being said about them. After a couple cycles of such a regime, maybe the politicians will get the message: your money's no good here. That would save untold millions in campaign funding. Plus, it would do one additional thing which would be worth its weight in gold: it would remove the politicians' cover, so that their corruption would stand out for all the world to see. If they steer legislation toward some particular "interest," it could no longer be explained away as the ongoing need for campaign financing. Who knows? We just might make honest men and women of our leaders yet.