The talk of the nation yesterday was, of course, Arlen Specter's switch from Republican to Democrat in the U.S. Senate, effectively delivering a filibuster-proof majority to the Demcorats upon the seating of Al Franken. Specter's move was precipitated by a poll showing Specter trailing Club for Feudalism Growth candidate Pat Toomey by over 20 points.
Most of the commentary since has correctly focused since on the rightward shift of the Republican Party as a whole, and the regressive Neanderthal nature of its base, which drags the party backward and away from the mainstream even as the progressive base pulls the Democratic Party forward, mostly into positions supported by a majority of the electorate.
But there's a danger in interpreting the Specter decision as simply a function of extremists vs. moderates, playing into a Broderite concern for a loss of "bipartisanship". Let us ignore for a moment the argument that "moderate" should be defined on a national rather than individual Party scale, as those supporting the majority of American opinion: national healthcare, an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq, etc. That would be too easy.
No, the problem is that I can already hear the mewling of Democratic consultants in California, tying any moves toward accountability by progressives, including but not limited to primaries against the likes of Jane Harman or Dianne Feinstein, to the shortsighted actions of Pat Toomey and his merry band of fools.
There's a big difference--so, in the spirit of Jane Harman, allow me to make a pre-emptive strike in an effort to nip any such whining in the bud. The difference isn't whether to take action against squishes and "moderates" in one's party, but where to do so.
Late last week, Democrats temporarily shelved a bill that would allow bankruptcy judges to modify the terms of mortgages on primary residences (also known as "cram-down"). Moderates who put the hold on this legislation, particularly former Wall Street investor Ellen Tauscher, crowed about it to the media.
This hardly amounts to a breakthrough win for party moderates - or a major concession by the speaker. But it was a consequential moment in the minds of moderate leaders who often find themselves marginalized in a caucus dominated by liberals.
"It shows we have bench strength, and it shows we can flex," said California Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher, who chairs the New Democrat Coalition and played a central role in negotiations over the bankruptcy bill [...]
Moderates worry Pelosi is routinely staking very liberal positions to push House versions of big bills as far to the left as possible to enhance their standing in negotiations with the historically centrist Senate. This might be a smart tactic, but it often hurts Democrats who rely on Republican votes to win reelection. Put bluntly, it makes them look too liberal [...]
That prompted lawmakers, like Tauscher, to limit the scope of the bankruptcy bill as much as possible, even though this measure is only loosely related to the president's broader proposal.
Tauscher's New Democrat Coalition teamed with their natural allies in the Blue Dog Coalition to impose 10 significant changes, including requirements that bankruptcy judges use federal guidelines to determine the fair market value of a home and that modified loans must be "unaffordable and not just underwater" to prevent wealthy homeowners from taking advantage of the process, according to a widely distributed e-mail from Adam Pase, executive director of the New Democrat Coalition.
This, of course, angered some liberals. "The New Dems' position is the banks' position," a senior Democratic aide involved in the bankruptcy negotiations complained on Friday. "New Democrats are shills for the banks."
It's confounding that any New Democrat thinks their constituents give a ring-a-ding about banking industry concerns, and are not in fact the very people struggling to keep their homes that this legislation would help.
More, including Tauscher staffers lying to bloggers, on the flip...
So are you scratching your head over my State Senator, Lou Correa, being locked out of his own office? Well, there's plenty of outrage from left to right in Orange County on this episode. And since I don't want to say too much more about this, I'll let you read what everyone else here in OC has to say about this nasty incident after the flip...
"This morning, I kissed my children goodbye, dropped my daughter off at school, got on a plane, got here, found out I was locked out of my office," said [Senator Lou] Correa, D-Santa Ana.
This is what Lou told Brian Joseph at The OC Register when asked about the lockout. Yes, you heard me right- Lou Correa, along with Sens. Gloria Negrete McLeod (D-Chino) and Ron Calderon (D-Montebello), were locked out of their own offices. And why? Because Don Perata was being a brat.
Follow me after the flip for more on this nonsense...
