blue dog

Pelosi's Power Play: Do the Blue Dogs only bark?

Good morning, and welcome to the start of the 111th Congress. Your intrepid blogger remains on his voter-mandated vacation as he writes this, and it is not for a lack of trying.

As we move forward to the ceremonial opening of Congress, we must ask ourselves if Speaker Nancy Pelosi will beckon children to gather about her as she is anointed like she did at the start of the 110th Congress. Or, will she beckon the special-interest group which will be at the heart of every Democrat this session: the union bosses?

The news reports today detail how Madame Speaker has, with the likely tacit approval of the incoming president, decided to embrace her own versions of "Hope" and "Change": changing the rules of the House of Representatives back to the pre-Newt days in the hope of quashing all dissent and opposition in order to protect her caucus from politically tricky votes, and installing committee chairman for life - going back on the reforms Republicans brought forth in 1994.

House Democrats are poised to approve new rules that will significantly increase their authority while taking the bullets out of the few legislative weapons Republicans have in the lower chamber.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has approved the changes from the last Congress, when House GOP members frustrated their Democratic counterparts by winning over two dozen amendment battles on the floor.

Pelosi’s move has set up a divisive mood on the first day of the 111th Congress, which Republicans say runs counter to the tone set by President-elect Obama.

Republican leaders intend to fight the rules changes, which would curtail their ability to delay legislation by forcing Democrats to take politically difficult votes.

“This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-elect Obama promised,” the GOP leaders wrote Monday in a letter to Pelosi.

Republican leadership aides say the changes will make it easier for the Speaker to run the House and protect vulnerable House Democrats.

As I write, Rep. John Larson (the new Rahm) is speaking on C-SPAN about working together with Republicans to improve the country (which is easy, I guess, when you write the rules in such a way that the only "working together" comes from voting with the Democrats). Per CQ:

Democratic leaders are taking a hard look at preventing the minority party from scoring easy political points with motions to recommit a bill to committee with instructions to make contentious language changes and then report it back to the House “promptly.” In the outgoing Congress, “promptly’’ has meant an indefinite hold, because committees were not willing to adopt poison-pill amendments sponsored by the minority.

Most motions to recommit require instead that an amended bill be returned to the floor “forthwith,” which means within minutes.

GOP aides complain that the possible limit motions to recommit would take away the minority’s ability to attack tax increases in must-pass bills. That’s because the pay-as-you-go budget rule, which is likely to be renewed, does not allow amendments or motions to recommit forthwith that would remove any of the offsets it requires in legislation.

The pay-as-you-go rule requires that all new entitlement spending or new tax cuts be offset with equivalent spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere.

So, to sum up. Speaker Pelosi will strip term-limits from committee chairman - giving them virtually unbridled power to dominate the minority party - while stripping the minority of the power to recommit a motion back to a committee. That sounds an awful lot like one-party consolidation to me.

What the Democrats are doing 'Right'

Originally posted at www.maidensong.wordpress.com

If ever there was evidence needed to prove that the GOP finds itself in a place where its message lacks resonance with with the American voting public, it was provided by the stunning special election upsets that have taken place in recent weeks in traditionally Republican strongholds. The Republican losses appear to be a disturbing precursor of things to come.

These losses set the House and Senate Republicans atwitter as they came to realize that there was no longer any seat that could be considered a 'safe seat,' and started the main stream liberal media buzzing happily about the coming Democratic apocalypse.

What no one seems to be talking about however, is HOW the dems are winning in these GOP strongholds. They are doing it by running as far to the right as they can, without actually being a Repubican conservative. If this trend continues, and if elected officials actually follow through on the platforms on which they run, a Democratic 'majority' may not be the liberal nightmare we see coming down the pike after all. That caucus may in fact be a party potentially divided against itself, with senators and congressmen ripe for crossover picking.

This does not mean that Republicans shouldn't fight agressively to retain or win seats in the fall. It does mean, however, that Americans in general may not suffer as much 'damage' as they might, if a Democratic majority in congress was more liberal than conservative.

The congressional Blue Dogs are increasing in numbers, and continue to flex their clout, (as they have demonstrated already at least once this session, see link beow)

http://republicanleader.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=90894

Their presence in congress, along with that of Republicans who have rediscovered their conservative roots, may be enough to stymie much of the liberal tax and spend agenda that the Pelosi coalition might try to push through.

On a recent MSNBC Sunday morning round table analysis, Harold Ford Jr. (D) observed that there was a 'lesson to be learned' by Democrats from the southern special election upsets. "Democrats cannot run liberal campaigns" he said. Republican panelists in on the discussion, including former presidential candidate governor Mike Huckabee, pointed out the dangers that would be inherant in running against conservative Democrats, including the possible backlash caused by attempting to smear them generically as 'liberal' if they are known within the community as being pro-life, pro-gun and otherwise 'conservative' by the layman's standards. Republicans are going to have to run as conservatives, and not 'against 'liberals' if they want to be successful.

The one good thing about the leftist extremism being discovered this primary cycle, scary as it is,..is that it is forcing the true Democratic base to find their moderate center identity again. More and more on pro Hillary blogs, I'm seeing Barack Obama labled Marxist/Socialist. Many who were swept up in Move On sympathy for Bill, have realized just how far left of center their party has veered, and are determined to win it back; even if that means electing John McCain.

This website is about being forward thinking and creatively agressive about the next direction that the Right needs to take. As events unfolded this primary season, it became more and more obvious to me at least, that the survival of the right, seems tied to its ability to be the dominant partner of the 'conservative Middle'. This is why John McCain and Mike Huckabee with their almost populist appeal, were the last men standing on the right. The great irony of Obama's campaign, is that he's running as the great unifier, when every indication is that his idea of unity, is everybody taking two steps to the left. Not going to happen.

But the people do want change...so where does that leave us? I'm going to make a stretch and argue that McCain/Moderate conservative VP is going to hold the whitehouse, because Obama will not be able to find his way to the center again if the opposition research and 527s have their way. But I think the dems are going to crush the GOP in the congressional races.

Watch for the make up of the majority though. The Democrats if they are smart, will run Blue Dogs in conservative districts, and they will be our ace in the hole on the really big bills. (I hope!)

If a 'moderate' president McCain has a largely 'moderate' congress to work with, it is to be hoped that 'moderately more' progress can be made in Washington that we have seen in recent years.

Maybe the Next Right... is the Middle.

Thoughts?

Syndicate content