David Sirota: The Democrats have no more excuses

[OhioChick]

Friday, May 1, 2009

With Arlen Specter and Al Franken, the Democrats will have 60 votes in the Senate. They can no longer blame Republicans for standing in the way of a progressive agenda.

May 1, 2009 | As counsel for the Warren Commission investigating the Kennedy assassination, Arlen Specter described a "magic bullet" that changed America. Four decades later as a U.S. senator, Specter is providing another history-altering magic bullet -- one Democrats will either fire off in a starting gun, or use in their suicide.

By leaving the Republican Party this week, the five-term Pennsylvania lawmaker eliminated the last Democratic rationale for inaction: the Senate filibuster. With Minnesota Democrat Al Franken expected to be seated soon, and now with Specter, Democrats will have the 60 Senate votes needed to overcome all parliamentary obstructions.

This legislative magic bullet will force Democrats to fulfill their policy promises and potentially commence an era of dominance, or they will fail and be annihilated at the polls.

No longer can they blame Republicans for stopping bills to reform healthcare, tax, defense and trade policy. In command of the White House, the autocratic House of Representatives, and soon a filibuster-proof Senate majority, Democrats will have total authority to do whatever they want, and no scapegoat to fault. That means, as ABC News' Rick Klein said, "This is Democrats' turn to govern, no excuses" -- and it means we're about to find out whether their pledges were genuine.

Ever since the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress, Democrats have guaranteed "real change" if we give them back control of government. They've made this pledge despite helping Republicans to deregulate the financial system and to plunge the country into the Iraq war. And at every turn, they've blamed the GOP, rather than themselves, for gridlock.

When they temporarily took back the Senate in 2001 after Vermont Sen. Jim Jeffords' party switch, they said the Republican House would stymie their priorities -- a logical argument that came true. When they won both houses of Congress in 2006, they said George W. Bush would veto their agenda -- again, a fair assertion that proved correct. When they won both Congress and the White House in 2008, they insisted they still couldn't do very much because their 58 Senate votes couldn't overcome a filibuster -- a less believable claim considering Obama's bully pulpit, but nonetheless at least mathematically valid.

It has been like watching a 15-year version of an Indiana Jones film -- every time we think the quest to find the ark will be completed, there's been another twist, putting off the promised conclusion just a little bit more.

Of course, when Dr. Jones' adventure did eventually end and the ark was found and opened, it gruesomely melted the heads of those standing nearby as they euphorically screamed, "It's beautiful!" And, in fact, that's one possible outcome of Specter's announcement.

Sixty Senate votes do seem beautiful ... until 10 bought-off, right-wing and/or weak-kneed Democrats decide to keep helping Republicans make the upper chamber our nation's single most powerful obstacle to "real change." When that happens, 60 votes become an ugly flame that sears the electoral flesh off politicians who technically have the power to act, but whose subsequent failure to deliver exposes their dishonesty.

The other possible outcome is actual progress. Even the most recalcitrant Democratic senators likely comprehend that in a 60-vote environment brimming with expectations, their continued alliance with Republican obstructionists could endanger their whole party and consequently their individual careers. They have to understand that it's one thing to vote against your party's universal healthcare promise when the GOP could filibuster such a proposal -- but it's quite another thing to cast a deciding vote against that promise when your party has all the power. That reality could forge a new cohesion necessary for results -- and for an enduring majority.

It all depends on how Democrats use the magic bullet Arlen Specter just handed them.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/05/01/democrats_specter/

[montanacowboy]

1. Damn Straight!

Sirota hits the nail on the head

Where will their excuses come from now? I am sure old weak knee Harry Reid will somehow be able along with the Blue Dog traitors snatch defeat from the jaws of victory

This is the moment and if they fail we will never have this opportunity again

[antigop]

2. The excuses are already appearing on DU n/t

[OhioChick]

3. So I've noticed. n/t

[gcomeau]

4. Sirota needs to reign it in, this is *not* helpful.

"The Democrats" have no more excuses... as if the party is a single organism. That is just fucking stupid. It's stupid first because it's ridiculously obvious it isn't true, and second because it's counterproductive to his own agenda to make people think it is.

I'm entirely on his side with the need to push the agenda while we can, but this is not helping. If he wants to get tough on someone get tough on the SPECIFIC freaking Democratic Senators that keep obstructing the ones trying to get something done, instead of tarring and feathering the entire goddamn party with the same giant brush if those few manage to stop the rest from getting the votes they need. Get THOSE FEW in trouble with their constituents. Point out THOSE FEW have no more excuses. Get THOSE FEW ousted the next time there's a primary and replaced with someone who will play ball.

Screaming to the nation that if these goals aren't met because people like the Blue Dogs refuse to vote the way we need them to means "the Democrats" have failed undermines support for the entire party, Senators we want to keep and Senators we can do without alike. He's being a moron writing things like this and he needs to shut the hell up and think before he speaks. All he's telling people right now is if those Blue Dogs manage to obstruct things once again then what they should do is conclude they should give up on Democrats getting anything done, and where the hell is THAT going to lead? We just got the damn Republicans out of power and here he is setting up the atmosphere necessary to see them put back in it in a few years without giving it a second thought.

[montanacowboy]

5. Validating #2

nt

[gcomeau]

6. Brilliant response.

Don't address a damn thing I said... don't find fault with a single fact I listed... just declare it an "excuse" and dismiss it out of hand.

Boy, you sure got me nailed! I should just pack it up and go home right now, no way can your stellar debate skills be overcome.

[ihavenobias]

7. I completely agree that the rest of the Dems NEED to call out of the corporatist.

The problem is the number of Dems in bed with special interests seems to be pretty high, and growing every election. They know how their bread is buttered, and it seems unlikely anything will happen unless and until we have public funding of elections.

I think it's up to us to put massive pressure (in various ways, including donating to organizations like Act Blue) on these corporate funded Democrats, to the point where the media HAS to cover it, and where voters in their respective states primary them to death.

[dreamnightwind]

13. exactly

This is exactly the place to attack:

"The problem is the number of Dems in bed with special interests seems to be pretty high, and growing every election. They know how their bread is buttered, and it seems unlikely anything will happen unless and until we have public funding of elections."

Maybe we can pick public funding of elections as the one reform that absolutely must happen while the Dems have control. Push for it while ignoring, or at least deferring, all other issues.

It's the reform that enables all other reforms.

Could we strong-arm our party into enacting public funding of elections? I don't know, but we have to try.

I don't see what they have to lose. In a fair, level playing field, where candidates are not secretly in the grip of large corporate donors and lobbyists, how would Dem vs Repub battles play out?

It seems to me that all the Repubs have is deception and corporate money/power. In almost every case, they're asking voters to go against their own interest in order to vote Republican. In their hearts (pig hearts mostly), the Republicans could care less about the average Joe.

Dems, on the other hand, for the most part, actually do care. They're just caught up in this power game where they have to sell out to win. Take away the need to sell out, and they can win on the legitimacy of their ideals, which in my opinion is real. Dems actually do represent the average voter, or would if they could.

We have to apply tremendous pressure on this issue. It seems to me it's a winner for Democrats. If they won't go along, we'll know that the problem is more than just a system that rewards sell-outs. We'll know that in truth they're rotten.

It'll be a mix, of course, some are indeed rotten and must be removed, but I still believe most of the Dems would do right by us if they felt like they could and still get re-elected.

Public financing would give them that opportunity. It would have to be done right, no corporate money (hard or soft), outlaw media ad buys too (but mandate free airtime for candidates and exploration of issues).

All obvious stuff, which desparately needs to get done, and won't until millions of people put their precious time and financial resources into bringing about this change.

We ought to be able to win over some Republican grass-root support for this, too. Mostly they're just ordinary people like us who have been duped by wedge issues into voting against their own interests.

[ihavenobias]

19. I've made this point in the past.

"Maybe we can pick public funding of elections as the one reform that absolutely must happen while the Dems have control. Push for it while ignoring, or at least deferring, all other issues."

As much as it hurts to put aside other issues, I think this is (unfortunately) exactly right.

[sandyd921]

21. That's definitely at the root of the problem.

That and the corporatist stranglehold on our politics (i.e., corporations are people, don't cha know!).

[dgibby]

9. Well said.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. Look- ahhhh....ummmmm...look-

The rest of the Democrats are sitting there letting the Blue Dogs do as they please, not saying a word about it. So why is that?
Your whole concept that we should sit and cheer for folks who vote against us and trash our families just because they are band D is one hell of a long walk to take for a mere excuse.
In politics, you get what you give. The Democrats as a whole need to feel the heat to force them to pressure their peers to vote like Democrats.
Plus, just your hyperbolic and adjective heavy writing. Geez, calling Sirota names right and left really puts forth a strong argument! He's a poo-poo doody head! The whole playground mentality of rooting for your clique and bashing the others is just not persuasive.

[gcomeau]

16. What the hell post were you trying to answer?

When you obviously accidentally clicked "reply" to mine instead?

First, I never said anything remotely similar to this: "Your whole concept that we should sit and cheer for folks who vote against us and trash our families just because they are band D is one hell of a long walk to take for a mere excuse."

Second, I could be accused of calling Sirota one name. One. IF you stretch and try to say that saying someone is acting like a moron is the same thing as saying they are a moron. Which it isn't. But even if it was doing something ONCE sure as hell isn't doing it "left and right".

Third, pointing out something is stupid when it is... let's say, stupid... is hardly ithe same thing as using names like "poo-poo doody head".

So clearly, you meant to reply to someone else. And I'm rather curious who it was.

[Skittles]

8. I'm sure they'll get right on it

:rofl:

[KG]

10. it's apparent that no matter what kind of legislative margins the dems have

the party leadership seems inured to the concern of the voters, tone deaf to the electorate but happy to entertain lobbyists bearing gifts of campaign contributions.

[populistdriven]

11. sirota has reverted to a grade school mentality

Al and Arlen couldn't be more different yet he conflates the two into a single progressive agenda. Why does anyone even read his weak pieces?

[bvar22]

12. I also am waiting for the excuses.

Our current gang of Corporate sponsored Senators couldn't pass Progressive/Pro-Working Class legislation with a 75 vote "majority".

Not as long as the Usual Obstructionists are sitting in the Democratic seats:
Landrieu
Nelson
the other Nelson
Pryor
Lincoln
Lieberman
Reid
Specter
Carper

[Bluenorthwest]

15. And if we give to DNC, we are helping keep them in place

When they announced they would finance Specter against real Democrats in the Primary, well, that was one more reason not to send money to Chairman Homophobe Kaine to pass off to his erstwhile Republican pals.

[Doctor_J]

17. I have doubts that Franken will ever take office

No one ever makes the GOP follow any rules. After they stole the election in 2000, and the Felonious Five weren't impeached/dragged bodily from office, they went ahead and did it again in 2002 and again in 2004. They have now gotten away with stealing Franken's Senate seat for 4 months, and no one has done anyting about it, so they will continue to obstruct democracy indefinitely. If anything were going to be done about it, it would have already been done, either by Harry The Weak, or by 2nd Amendment Dems in MN.

[mule_train]

18. The decisions on trade will say it all

let's hope they say the right thing

[TankLV]

20. NO MORE EXCUSES!!!!

Isn't it interesting that when the repukes were in in power, they could do all they wanted., and the minority could "do nothing".

And when the repukes are now in the minority, they STILL controll the agenda...

fucking SPINELESS QUIZLING "dems"...