Is this REALLY a 'Democratic Congress'?

[renie408]

I keep hearing a lot of people, both liberal and conservative, blaming the 'Democratic Congress' for...well, everything. I also hear people saying that Dems have the power to 'get things done' and they just aren't because they are in the pocket of corporations/pussies/closet conservatives. Then there are the people who say that with a majority as slim as we currently, ahem, 'enjoy', that the Dems are forced into more compromise than they might be otherwise. Take the SCHIP funding, for one. I didn't know until last night when I heard Paul Krugman talking about it that the only way Dems could get enough GOP votes on the SCHIP bill was to exclude any kind of 'regular' tax to cover it. Which forced them to look around and the compromise they came up with was taxing cigarettes, not because that was their first or best idea, but because they felt like fully funding SCHIP was important and that was the way they could get it done that the GOP would sign off on.

Now there is a stink over excluding transgender people from a bill that protects lesbians and gays from job discrimination. People are attacking Barney Frank for saying that to get the bill passed, they had to drop transgender people from it. The alternative being to keep transgender in the bill and have it defeated, meaning NOBODY gets protected. But a lot of people are now saying he is a sellout, etc, because that whole 'number of votes' thing is crap.

So here's my question: Do the Dems or don't the Dems have the clout and the votes to get things pushed through congress and through Bush? Is it an excuse or not?

Also, it just occurred to me to ask, how many 'borderline' Dems are there? That are members of the Democratic party, but come from relatively conservative districts and so would have a hard time back home if they passed some bills?

[opihimoimoi]

1. Apparently, we have some closet DINOs in place....and the Media?...its a PUB PLOI

to denigrate/blame....thats their game....

[renie408]

2. So, you think that the votes are there, but some Dems aren't

working and playing well with others?

[opihimoimoi]

14. Yup...in my book, the Pubs knew they were in trouble a long time ago

so they played it safe...infiltrate with closet Pubs posing as Dems.....

[renie408]

3. Kicking this myself, because I really want to understand this. n/t

[MethuenProgressive]

4. 'Do the Dems have the clout and the votes to get things pushed through" - No.

Whole, original quote:
"Do the Dems or don't the Dems have the clout and the votes to get things pushed through congress and through Bush? Is it an excuse or not?"
The answer is No.
We have a simple majority, and super majorities are needed to push through tough legislation.

[renie408]

6. So when either side uses says "The Dem congress isn't doing X"

It is spin. Because the reality is that the Dems cannot, alone, get Bush impeached or the war stopped or whatever it is that people are wanting done. They have to have cooperation from the GOP. Is that it?

[MethuenProgressive]

12. Kinda sorta. What it really means is we need a Democratic President.

And more seats in Congress, too.

[left is right]

15. I would feel better about the do nothing Democratic Congress

if win or lose they forced Repukes to vote against good, progressive bills. While I would rather have the SChIP, I think there is long-term benefit for the country to see, over and over again, the Repukes voting against it. I am willing to give up some instant gratification, if there is some possibility that repukes become discredited for at least half a generation. I want people to see how really evil they are. I don't understand how just thinking about how wrong they are doesn't leave a bad taste in the public's mouths

[glowing]

5. Until the states with right to work laws (which is another Orwellian

doublespeak), get rid of their laws, any workers right's are pretty much null and void. Right to Work states say you can be fired for no reason at all. Its the company's right. So, in some states this law is completely useless.

[mmonk]

7. We should stick to democratic ideals.

Freshmen democrats should have little clout instead of us organizing our whole strategy around them. They haven't earned their stripes yet while others such as Conyers have. Poor leadership IMO. Flame me if you feel so inclined. But I think they should be whipped into line instead of making deals on the side like they did with Cheney on surveillance powers.

[renie408]

9. No flaming from me. I hadn't considered that angle.

It is something for me to look into and think about. That is why I ask stuff here. Sometime the responses send me off in a direction I hadn't thought about.

You are right. I remember reading about freshmen Dems being given key committee spots to help oust-proof them for '08. I can imagine that would blow back in your face with unknown quantities.

[Totally Committed]

8. No... especially if DLC DINOs don't count. (And they DON'T in my book.)

So, to answer your question:

No REAL majority + no REAL leadership = No REAL clout.

I believe "SCREWN" is the current word for our position.

TC

[OHdem10]

10. There is one simple truth---When the GOP was in charge

they voted straight party line and pushed legislation
through. It phazed them not, if only GOP votes passed
a bill. The bill was passed. Many here on this board
criticize the GOP because of their lockstep votes and
Party discipline. The GOP are tough. They will refuse
to help on a members next election--no funds. They
will threaten with finding someone to run against the
member who "does not fall into line".

Like it or not this is why they command respect from the
Media--they are seen as better at governing because of
their discipline and unity.

The painful truth is the DLC, Blue Dogs are conservative
Democrats. They will not conform and often their positions
on issues are much closer to GOP than Democrats.

Our party does not impose discipline. Therefore, they
are not shown respect by Media. How often do we hear
comments--"the Democrats cannot agree".

[renie408]

11. Did they have a larger majority? n/t

[OHdem10]

13. The GOP says it does not matter --the size of the Majority

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. What they DO have is a number of Blue Dogs they have to pacify to protect their seats.

Which, in turn, gives the Democrats the majority, which in turn, becomes meaningless because they have to vote with the Republicans.

[KittyWampus]

17. Politics is an art requiring compromise. Idealouges do not, by nature, compromise

Most DU'ers who slam elected Democrats have never been in a position of leadership.

That being said, sometimes I do believe our elected Dems are too timid and ultimately ineffective.

They are trying to be statesmen whilst dealing with NeoCon henchmen.