Tag Archives: democrats

2010: Success And Failure Merge

My personal memories of 2010 will be less than stellar; outside of the growth of this blog there is a paucity of professional accomplishments to celebrate. Politically, 2010 will stand as one of the most confusing years in the history of our nation. The hallmark of this year is the level to which political message has risen above real political action and governance. This is the year where the transformation of political parties has come to fruition. Once instruments that supported and nurtured a set of principles, Democrats and Republicans have outgrown their simple and honest purpose. Principles are now defined and crafted to suit the ambitions of the parties.

Republicans have long been proficient at political branding; indeed, the conservative success of the last thirty years is linked directly to their ability to push Democrats away from their own name. But 2010 stands as a shining example of that talent in action. In 2008, Americans had reason to firmly reject the notions of supply side economics and interventionist foreign policies that conservatism had wrought. The Republican Party was dead, the pundits declared, and it would be a long stay in the wilderness before they returned. President Obama’s pragmatism and ability to work across the aisle (demonstrated in the Senate), would preclude real controversies. Domination of the Senate and House by the Democrats would allow for the orderly procession of problem-solving legislation. 2010 culminates a very different 2 year period from the one predicted by the pundits.

Continue reading →

First Thoughts On The House

Mandates and messages from the people are the phrases on the lips of political reporters and party leaders at the moment. In our democracy, mandates seemingly last only as long as the next great political talking point. Even though all of the analytical evidence relating to stimulus is unequivocal in stating the bill’s success, the numbers from the midterm elections point to that bill as the biggest Democrat-killer. Almost 1/4 of the seats represented by Democrats who voted for Stimulus were taken by the Republicans. But does that point to public anger, or does it reinforce the deep misunderstanding of the body politic for economic issues?

Reagan’s Republican Revolution was sidetracked by major losses in the 1982 midterms because of a recession that reached its peek that summer. Just as with President Obama, Mr. Reagan’s first budgetary effects on the economy would not have been felt until autumn of the first year of the term at the earliest. That factors like unemployment and foreclosures are lagging indicators (as death is a lagging indicator of an injury causing internal bleeding), is a concept that very few voters contemplate. But what of the other key issues in the so-called Obama/Pelosi agenda; what of Health Care Reform and Cap and Trade?

Just over 81% of the seats held by Democrats voting for Cap and Trade stayed in the liberal column. Similarly, just under 81% of those seats voting for Health Care Reform were rewarded with another Democratic term. If those numbers stand in contrast to the new themes peddled by the conservative mainstream media, then consider one more number. More than 84% of the seats held by Democrats who were loyal to the so-called Obama/Pelosi agenda are still held by Democrats. Theses are not numbers that describe, by themselves, a broad ranging repudiation of Mr. Obama’s agenda. These numbers, taken in combination with the broad range of defeats at both the state and federal levels, speak to a rather typical electorate frustrated and nervous about a poor economy.

For progressives (those with courage still call themselves liberals), the message can not be clearer; vote your conscience and then stand behind your votes. The entire Democratic Party ran away from their votes on these bills. Why should any reasonable independent or middle of the road Republican have believed these acts to be anything more than frightening, when the very people pushing them were afraid of them? Last minute efforts to “stand behind” health care reform do not count; voters see them for what they are…desperate acts. There are lessons to be learned, for liberals, from this cycle. There are real stories, anchored in facts, to be told by the media. Even my Las Vegas upbringing won’t give me the courage to bet on either of those things happening.

In the meantime, Republicans in Congress and the good folks who voted for them won a fairly contested election. Our democracy will realign per the results of this cycle, and move on as the Constitution and tradition provide. Of course this all means that John Boehner will get to prove how he can balance the budget, cut taxes, and keep everyone happy at the same time. Good luck Mr. Presumptive Speaker!

The Rational Middle is listening…

Unconstitutional!

It is the singular measure of the extremes our nation is swinging between that our political debate so often involves the Constitution. A brilliant document and the creation of great compromise, our Constitution serves as the foundation and framing of the nation. The cement was poured and set over 200 years ago, and the framing has been added, in the form of amendments, at various intervals since that time. In our great arrogance today, we have decided that every problem requires a Constitutional remedy. This practice is apparent at the level of state politics, where activists have turned to amendments to codify attacks on marital rights. It is now becoming evident at the federal level, where both “sides” of the ideological spectrum have lined up the Constitution in their sights.

Changing the foundation and framing of our great structure is, first and foremost, an act of destruction. Demolition must occur, and in this type of work, blow back is inevitable. Typically, an amendment is added to correct an overwhelming injustice when that injustice is favored by the bulk of society. Representative Aaron Schock’s recent statements on the judicial ruling against California’s Proposition 8 (a referendum that banned gay marriage), were beside the point. He disagreed with the ruling because he stated it was against the will of the people. He is wrong because protecting individual rights, after all, is the act of protecting those classes who cannot protect themselves against the power of the majority.

Continue reading →

American Guns

The images are engraved in our American minds; all of our heroes have guns strapped to their sides. Cowboys in the Old West, rebels in post-Apocalyptic futures, and even Luke Skywalker; all of them packed heat. Some two decades ago, it was a Democratic party position to fight for aggressive gun control. Handguns and assault weapons were the most common targets, and why not? In a 2000 survey by the United Nations, the United States ranked in the middle of total homicides, a number driven by the 7th highest total in gun homicides. People may indeed kill people, but it is easier and quicker with a firearm.

By the turn of the century however, Democratic politicians had largely conceded the issue of banning firearms on the federal level. Many Democrats who lost their seats in the 1994 election attributed the defeats, not to the Clinton attempt at health reform, but the votes for the assault weapons ban. The Clinton ban ended in 2004 as the Senate voted 90-8 against a bill that would have reauthorized it. In 2007, after the Democratic takeover of the House, a measure reauthorizing and expanding the Clinton-era assault weapons ban garnered just 67 cosponsors. H.R. 1022 was introduced in February and dead by March.

Continue reading →

Poll Position

We live in the era of permanent campaigns. Elections which used to be contained within the month or year of the actual voting, now form a constant backdrop to the democracy. Alongside the toxic commentary and baseless opinions that dominate cable “news”, voters can see a constant parade of poll results. What we the people aren’t shown, is the question order, context, or full spectrum of questions found in the polls. As with all reporting, it is the information that we don’t see or hear that demonstrate the bias or intent of the source.

The original intent of political polling is customer service; a politician or business asks the customers what their feelings are in order to better design the service. But polling has taken on a very different role in U.S. politics today. Winning the “battle” of public opinion on specific bills is the key to the process; prove you can drive approval, and networks, newspapers, and magazines will follow your cues. Prove you can drive a story, and political allies and fundraisers will flock to your banner. Polling, and the poor standard of reporting that accompanies the art, are the foundation for the straw-man strategy that political operatives have now perfected.

Continue reading →

The War On The Working Class

For years, America has been treated to a steady attack on poor people. When bad things happened over hill and dell, you could bet that poor people were the cause. White poor people in Appalachia, brown poor people in the Southwest, and black poor people everywhere; where there was crime, despair, or peeling picket fences, there was poor people. Poor people, it seemed, were poor because they didn’t like work. Poor people were poor because they were lazy. As with many arguments, there were, and are, nuggets of truth to the claims. Some percentage of the poor, perhaps even a significant percentage, were and are lazy. But much of the focus on the poor was of a political nature.

Democrats, starting in the 1960′s, began to specialize in getting the poor vote. Republicans, beginning with the Reagan Democrats in 1980, started drafting working class Americans to vote against programs perceived as catering to the poor. Class division, after all, is such a wonderful tool for creating electoral momentum. But we have moved past the poor in today’s America. Much of the architecture set up to ensure help for the poor has fallen by the wayside; even our education system is being pushed out of relevance. Nowadays, the political powers that be have picked out a new target; the working class.

Continue reading →