Posted on 04/11/2007 9:49:44 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
These should be heady days for liberal Democrats, with their party controlling Congress, a Progressive Caucus boasting six dozen members and one of their own, Nancy Pelosi, serving as speaker of the House.
Instead, some liberal lawmakers say they have begun to feel marginalized by Pelosi and other House leaders, who have so far played down some of the liberal concerns and charted a course toward the political middle. They have begun to complain that Pelosi has overplayed her campaign promise to "govern from the center," taking special pains to appease moderates while neglecting some long-standing bullet points on the liberal to-do list.
"People are saying, 'When will it be our turn?'" said liberal Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.). "I just hope the pendulum starts to swing where there's more attention, consultation, respect and understanding around our issues."
Pelosi's drive to the center is a marked departure from the GOP model of governance under former majority leader Tom DeLay, who would often favor conservatives under an operating philosophy that respected the "majority of the majority": the conservative bloc.
The Progressive Caucus, with its 72 members, now represents the largest faction of House Democrats. But its concerns sometimes get short shrift as leaders look to curry favor with the Blue Dogs, a group of 43 conservative House Democrats.
In one instance last month, liberals mounted a vigorous campaign to modify the $124 billion wartime spending bill to require the withdrawal of U.S. combat troops from Iraq by Christmas. But Democratic leaders opted for a more moderate plan, coupling a longer withdrawal timeline with a series of waivers to allow the president to circumvent some new requirements. The approach frustrated many liberals, who blocked the bill's passage for a day before grudgingly agreeing that passing any withdrawal timeline was better than handing the Republicans a victory.
On the recent House budget resolution, Democratic leaders and House Budget Committee Chairman John M. Spratt Jr. (D-S.C.) again steered toward the center, accepting so many moderate proposals that the Blue Dog Coalition decided not to propose its own alternate budget, as it has in past years.
"There's a lot of attention being paid to Blue Dog concerns," noted an aide to a liberal Democrat. "A minority of the caucus is controlling the agenda. You have to think about your base, not just the vulnerable members."
As liberals privately groused, Blue Dogs crowed.
"The Blue Dog endorsement of the John Spratt House Budget Committee budget represents the fact that we know how to take yes for an answer," said Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D), praising the budget during a Blue Dog news conference.
Rep. Dennis Moore (D-Kan.) was similarly sanguine.
"The Blue Dogs had at least four meetings with Chairman Spratt about what we'd like to see in the budget, and they did everything we asked in those respects," he chortled.
And Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) piled on: "It didn't make sense for us to write an alternative budget, because we helped write the Democratic budget."
Liberals were not as heartened. Although they praised Spratt for reaching out to them and incorporating modest increases in domestic spending, they did not get any cuts in defense funding or any rollback of the president's tax cuts for the wealthy. They did ultimately endorse Spratt's budget, but they and the left-leaning Congressional Black Caucus presented alternate budget plans on the House floor.
House liberals do not have as tight a hold on their party as Republican conservatives once did. They represent a plurality of the majority, and some are resentful when they lose out to the less numerous Blue Dogs.
"We're saying balance. What helped us get here was not a cautionary tone but a bold tone," Grijalva said, adding that the House's expected consideration of comprehensive immigration reform would be a "litmus test" for how strongly Democratic leaders would press legislation favored by liberals.
Yet others reject the notion that liberals haven't been rewarded. They cite the recently passed Employee Free Choice Act, a favorite of pro-labor Democrats, or the Democrats' early move to raise the minimum wage.
Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said the speaker was sympathetic to liberals and had moved to address many of their concerns. He noted that the vast majority of liberals had voted for both the wartime spending bill and the budget and that Pelosi had responded to their calls for a troop withdrawal timeline and increased funding for social programs.
"Progressives are a huge part of the caucus," Daly said. "She understands their concerns because they're her concerns. She's a progressive herself."
Political vulnerability often gives Blue Dogs an advantage over liberals when it comes to negotiating with Democratic leaders. Most Blue Dogs represent conservative districts in the South and Midwest, where the next viable Republican challenge seems as inevitable as the next election.
Many of the Democrats' new freshman members, the so-called "Majority Makers," represent Republican-leaning districts, whereas liberals tend to represent safely Democratic districts.
With a slim majority of only 16 House seats, Democratic leaders are acutely responsive to members who might face tough reelection fights, taking special care not to ask them to back plans too far to the left for their districts.
That political reality is well-understood by left-leaning Democrats, and some even agree that it represents the right way to govern.
"The progressives are always on the struggling end of trying to get our public policy agenda advanced in this House," said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). "But the progressives are concerned not only about their agenda but about the whole Democratic caucus. They're concerned about the speakership and concerned about keeping the Democratic majority."
And that pragmatism was behind the liberals' decision to endorse their leadership's budget plan, even as they were proposing their own or to drop their opposition to the wartime spending bill even as they renewed calls for the speediest possible withdrawal.
"It's the beauty and shortcomings of being a progressive," said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.). "Some progressives say, 'We're in the majority. We should be able to do more.' And the speaker, no matter which way you look at it, is a progressive in her heart. But she's the speaker, and we understand that and realize that the best thing to do is to want to help her."
Maxine that's because your Communist and Socialist policies stink.
And here I thought there were “none more left” than Ms. Pelosi.
Is is just me, or does this guy sound like the very epitome of a whining, liberal weenie? "We want more respect for our issues. Waaahhh, waaaah, waaaahh!"
By "concerns" the Looney Left means the impeachment of the President above all else. And yes, they're looney enough to believe that it's actually a possibility.
“”People are saying, ‘When will it be our turn?’” said liberal Rep. Raul M. Grijalva”
When you join the conservative and practical adult world.
Pelosi favoring moderates? On what issue???????
Come on folks. When Pelosi got elected, she thought she was the Queen of the United States and still believes that. She actually believes that everyone loves her. What she doesn’t realize is that no one else wanted her job during these times and she is the fall person for them. She’s not very bright.
This little pigressive cried whee, whee, whee all the way home.
Thank goodness we don't have a parliamentary system.
"The Management Secrets of Speaker Pelosi
Those 43 Blue Dogs are the only reason Pelosi is in power right now and she knows it.
In truth, do not think Libs are worried about Pelosi turning her cheek. . .but Pelosi might be worried about her Left-wing profile; particularly post her poll numbers show many Dems not too happy with her work ethic and the rest of her cadre as well.
“People are saying, ‘When will it be our turn?’” said liberal Rep. Raul M. Grijalva (D-Ariz.).
How about the horrible, horrible 1970’s when the liberals had overwhelming majorities in both houses and could pass whatever they wanted, override vetoes, etc. Those days are thankfully gone. You’ve had your turn, congressman and the results were disastrous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.