Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... - Newsweek.com

The Gaggle

RSS
SPONSORED BY

Author

Katie Connolly


Ben Adler


Jonathan Alter

Eleanor Clift

Eve Conant

Howard Fineman

Sarah Kliff

Andrew Romano


Daniel Stone




Links

Featured Postings

If You Love the Free Market, You Should Hate Mandated Suburban Sprawl

7:06 PM, March 18, 2010 | Comments (3)
There's nothing like a blogospheric spat about suburban sprawl. Matt Yglesias notes , and some conservatives concur, that sprawl is determined by heavy-handed government regulation requiring minimum parking requirements, large lot sizes, and segregation...

Gay Activists Stage Civil Disobedience as Health Reform Gets Closer to a Vote

6:29 PM, March 18, 2010 | Comments (3)

House Dems Wary of Health-Care Bait and Switch

7:52 AM, March 16, 2010 | Comments (11)

Archives

See All from September
Previous
September 2009
Next
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   
       
Full Post
Posted Friday, September 25, 2009 1:15 PM

Blue Dogs vs. Pelosi: How Vulnerable Are Conservative Dems, Really?

Holly Bailey
Forget all the drama with Republicans and President Obama. The most tumultuous relationship in Washington right now is playing out in the House, between the Blue Dog Democrats and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. On pretty much everything this year, the Blue Dogs have pushed back against Pelosi—the stimulus, energy, health care. This week there’s been a whole new round of anti-Nancy grumbling among conservative Dems, as Pelosi tries to finalize details of the House’s version of the health-care bill. Among other things, she’s still angling for the much-debated public option—even though, by the White House’s own admission, it will never pass the Senate—and this has the Blue Dogs up in arms.

The main complaint: that Pelosi is leading the House so far to the left that she’s not giving moderate and conservative Democrats cover for what looks to be a tough 2010 election. It’s not just health care. A lot of Blue Dogs, as well as Democrats in pivotal Rust Belt districts, are upset that Pelosi pushed the House to take up a contentious vote on climate change—even though, as Katie wrote yesterday, the Senate bill looks stalled. A few weeks ago your Gaggler was chatting with one Blue Dog Dem who owned up (without attribution, of course) to some serious misty water-colored memories of Rahm Emanuel’s time in the House, when he was viewed as a key emissary between the centrists and Pelosi. Emanuel, who oversaw the House Democrats' political committee, is credited with pushing Pelosi to protect potentially vulnerable members—especially conservative Dems whom he personally recruited. “He knows what we’re facing out there,” this lawmaker told NEWSWEEK. “I’m not sure the speaker does.” Yesterday, The Hill printed some very similar sentiments. “They are seriously endangering the majority,” an unnamed Blue Dog told the paper.

But is Pelosi getting a fair shake here? There is no doubt that 2010 could potentially be a rough year for Democrats. History suggests losses will happen—just ask Democrats who were around when the Republicans took control of Congress in 1994, the first midterm election of Bill Clinton’s presidency. And recent polls haven’t given much sign of hope either. Yet here’s one interesting stat: of the 28 Democratic seats that veteran election-predictor Charlie Cook rates as a “lean” or “tossup,” only seven are those of members of the Blue Dog coalition—and most of those lawmakers already have a serious fundraising advantage on their GOP opponents. That list includes Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat whose Alabama district went for John McCain in 2008. Griffith has already raised more than $500,000 for his reelection bid—almost 10 times what his Republican challenger, Lee Phillip, a GOP official, reports in the bank. Some don’t have a declared opponent at all, including Rep. Michael Arcuri, who represents a swing district in upstate New York.

Granted, not every vulnerable moderate or centrist Democrat in 2010 is a member of the Blue Dogs. But Blue Dogs are the most vocal when it comes to being worried about how Pelosi could harm their reelection chances next year. And they are the most high-profile when it comes to challenging the Democratic leadership—particularly on health-care reform. One thing is clear: as much trouble as Democrats might face in 2010, they are being helped by the huge fundraising advantage that comes with being an incumbent member of Congress, and, in some districts, the GOP’s struggle to recruit strong candidates. Still, we’ve got more than a year before Election Day. Back in 1994, the political tide against Democrats turned so quickly that nobody saw it coming. No current Dems—liberal or centrist or conservative—want to repeat that mistake.
Advertisement
You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: bdavis2555 (October 3, 2009 at 12:02 PM)

We need to vote the blue dawgs out of office because they obviously don't have the best interest of the majority of americans at heart. It sounds as though they're looking out for their own interest. VOTE THEM OUT!!

Report Abuse
Posted By: boom shaka (September 30, 2009 at 7:39 AM)

This is why I laugh at people who call Pelosi "dangerous".

She can't even control her own party, do those people really think she can advance any "agenda"?

PUH-LEEEEEEZE!

They don't support her on the public option, they don't support her on pulling out of Iraq, and they know not to get too close to her because she is a political lightening rod.  Because they lack seniority, they don't have anything for her to take away (ie bills, committee seats, etc) so they have no reason to fear her.

Is she influential?  Sure, any Speaker is.  Will she impose her will on the country?  Not a chance!

But then, I'm no ideologue.

Regards,

BS

Report Abuse
Posted By: pastafarianism (September 28, 2009 at 7:41 PM)

They shouldnt be worried about being reelected; they need to be worried about fixing the myriad of problems faced by our government.  The idea that they are even arguing about this type of crap is offensive.  Two words: term limits!

Report Abuse
Show All Comments (37) »