Posted on 11/22/2006 10:13:23 AM PST by .cnI redruM
Mel Watt is, and should be, a fairly happy man. On November 7, the North Carolina representative and chair of the all-Democratic Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) witnessed election returns that will, come January, make the 43-member caucus more powerful than it has been at any point in its 37-year existence. On November 8, Watt fired off a press release that made zero effort to contain the glee. "A Brand New Day for the American People," it declared, before going on to detail the various leadership and committee spoils his caucus would reap. It was, newspapers soon agreed, a pretty impressive treasure heap: five major committee chairs, 17 subcommittee chairs, and a whip spot to boot. But it's more than just big numbers. "It's historic," says CBC spokeswoman Myra Dandridge.
Well, so was the Rubik's Cube. But historic is not the same as desirable, and the question to be asked of the CBC's rise isn't whether it's unprecedented; it's whether it will actually lead to positive change. That's a harder one to answer: On one hand, it's true that the CBC's agenda--headlined by a bread-and-butter push to close disparities in health care, education, and employment--will be good for black Americans (and, as I wrote two weeks ago, good for keeping them in the Democratic Party). Then again, except for an interest in something called "equity in foreign policy," the agenda isn't so different from the party's boilerplate populist line: Good luck finding a Pelosi Democrat who supports healthcare inequality. But more worrying is that, over the last few years, the CBC has seemed less concerned with pursuing the interests of black Americans than with protecting the interests of black congressmen. And, Mel Watt's excitement notwithstanding, that's not something to be happy about.
f you found $90,000 in someone's freezer and had video evidence showing him accepting it as a bribe, you might think you'd stumbled upon an airtight case for punishment. That's what Nancy Pelosi thought of Louisiana Representative William Jefferson: When he was investigated for taking bribes, with pretty damning evidence (and a fast-approaching election), Pelosi pushed for a vote that pulled the radioactive representative from the powerful Ways and Means Committee. The move had the support of the vast majority of congressmen in the party--except, notably, the members of CBC. "The Caucus stood firmly behind Representative Jefferson," says Dandridge. Indeed, the caucus considered it kind of a no-brainer. "The first order of business for any CBC chair," she continues, "would be to protect his or her members, just like a lioness protects her baby cubs."
These are questionable priorities, but Jefferson was hardly the first cub to get sheltered. Two years ago, when Cynthia McKinney--the recently defeated Georgia congresswoman who had a penchant for September 11 conspiracies and scuffles with cops--started taking flak for her eccentricities, it was CBC members who sprang to her defense. And, if Alcee Hastings, Pelosi's likely and rather unorthodox pick to head up the House Intelligence Committee, is any guide, Jefferson and McKinney won't be the last. Hastings--a chronically debt-ridden Florida congressman who was once impeached for corruption as a federal judge--is obviously not the best person to head-up House Intelligence. (You can read the case against him here.) But last Thursday, according to Dandridge, the CBC sent a letter to Nancy Pelosi stating that the caucus was fully behind Hastings, and urging the incoming speaker to go ahead with the appointment.
And Pelosi probably will. One reason is that she enjoys what one CBC aide delightfully describes as a "tenuous" relationship with the caucus, a lackluster state of affairs that dates back to her perceived mishandling of the Jefferson situation: She was thought to have pushed too hastily for his removal. This perception led Watt to raise, loudly and implausibly, the specter of racism, and the incoming speaker is anxious to keep the relationship from deteriorating further. "She feels like she needs to handle the CBC with kid gloves," the aide elaborates. "She feels that, if she were to misstep, the members would attach bullhorns to their mouths and shout it from the mountaintops that there was a lack of representation and a lack of fairness." In the case of Hastings, they will have no shortage of mountaintops. After all, Pelosi made the conspicuously bad decision to stand by white Representative John Murtha--who has ethics problems of his own--in the race for House majority leader.
ut the CBC isn't just concerned with keeping people in; it's just as willing to keep people out. A few months ago, a 57 year-old white man named Steve Cohen, who was running to replace Harold Ford Jr. in Tennessee, mentioned that, if elected, he would try to join the CBC. The comment might seem a bit baffling, but it wasn't immediately unreasonable: 60 percent of his district is black, and Cohen, an affable man who ended up winning the election, insists that he only wanted to join if the CBC "felt comfortable with it." But it became very clear very quickly that the CBC was not comfortable with it. Just as fast as Cohen floated the idea of signing up, an internal CBC strategy memo obtained by The Washington Times--noting that it was "critical" that "membership remain exclusively African American"--torpedoed it. According to Dandridge and others, Cohen met with caucus members when he was in town last week, and is now "no longer interested in becoming a CBC member."
In one sense, it's hard to blame the caucus for looking after its own, or for pressing the party leadership on issues of diversity. As Dandridge put it in the days after the election, it's nice when you have "diversity among the ranks of the House leadership" that "mirrors how America looks." Unfortunately, the mirror fantasy doesn't quite square with reality--just ask the Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC). "Population-wise, the answer is no, we don't have the representation we should," gripes one senior CHC aide. It's true. After the 2000 census, Latinos passed blacks as the country's biggest minority. And, like blacks, they voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidates two weeks ago. Yet the 2006 election left the CHC with exactly one new committee chair. This isn't the CBC's fault--committee chairmanships are almost always determined by seniority--but the caucus' aggressiveness has made some difference: If Hastings were passed over for the top Intelligence Committee spot, the next in line would be longtime CHCer Silvestre Reyes.
he CBC knows there is reason for the Latino community to be unhappy. In 2001, the CHC accepted a painful deal requiring that it support Democratic incumbents even in races with Latino primary challengers--a backroom bargain meant to protect black lawmakers who, after the recent census, found themselves in districts with a plurality of Latinos. The deal stunted CHC growth, but not bitterness. And the CBC knows it. "You have folks that are grumbling," says one aide to a CBC member. "I can understand that they would be frustrated by not having a larger voice."
If the CBC hears that frustration, it should prove it: The caucus should use its enviably large voice to speak on the behalf of something other than itself. An interest group that gets what it wants by threatening to call Democratic officials racists can't have the party's interests at heart. If diversity is going to be more than gratuitous and petty, it needs to be treated as something other than a good unto itself. And if you're going to play identity politics, the least you can do is play it right.
The whole idea of the CBC and CHC is rascist. Where's the CWC or the CAC? Racial identity politics is as rascist as those who practice it.
Now that's the definition of racism.
I remember reading that when Denise Majette took Cynthia McKinney's job...the FIRST time she was not reelected...the CBC told Majette that the only way she would be welcome (she was black)...would be if she voted exactly how they TOLD her to vote.
I noticed she only lasted one term...and then McKinney was back...so, she must not have minded the bosses.
Not true; just more race-based pork. It's just that this pork can't be opposed for fear of becoming a racist.
BTTT
I think the Republicans changed THEIR rules so seniority wasn't enough, something about term limits on chair positions.
The CBC has so many senior people because they are sequestered into districts where there is never any competition, and nobody has any interest in democracy so there are only rare primary challenges, like with Cynthia McKinney.
And the black leaders have absolutely nothing else going for them in life, so they are NEVER going to retire, unlike a lot of senior white congressmen.
You know, this has got to be one Democrat that is seriously hating life right now.
And that puts a smile on my face.
The CBC has, as have labor unions, proved redundantly that they are no better, and in most cases worse, than the people they have gathered against.
In other words the CBC has Pelosi by the balls.
That's just OJ jury thinking.
Not only is it racist, but federal government facilities and likely funds are used by the caucus.
Denise Majette ran for the senate as a dem in Georgia after 1 term in the house, a real dumb move. Then Cynthia McKinney was elected again but lost this year in the primary so she is out again.
The Black Caucus is a bunch of reverse racists and socialists who couldn't care less about the national interest as a whole. And half of them are probably crooks.
Oh...my mistake then....I thought she must have lost to McKinney the second time.
Majette and Katherine Harris both made a big mistake...why would a one term House member jump to running for Senator??
Thanks for the information...and, I am still glad that McKinney is GONE.
What is the ACLU's position on this? Have they adopted a stance? Is it silence?
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.