Blogs and Stories
Blue Dog Bozos
Saul Loeb, AFP / Getty Images
It's not the Republicans who pose the biggest threat to Obama's agenda but the infuriating Blue Dog Democrats. The Daily Beast's Reihan Salam on the renegades threatening to kill health-care reform—and the Obama presidency.
Who are the Blue Dog Democrats? In theory, they are a caucus of moderate to conservative Democrats in the House, most of them hailing from rural and suburban swing districts. As Republican members melted away in 2006 and 2008, many were replaced by Blue Dogs, who essentially promised to be like Republicans, only anti-war and protectionist and economically populist. They've now emerged as the most serious threat to the Obama agenda.
The Blue Dogs have made a liar out of the president.
It's important to keep in mind that Blue Dogs are not conservatives. Rather, they appear to be, to put it unkindly, preening bozos. Instead of offering principled alternatives, they choose to Hoover up campaign donations from the well-heeled while stabbing their Democratic allies, many of whom made real sacrifices to get them elected, in the back.
As someone who thinks the Obama approach to health reform is badly misconceived, I am reluctantly rooting for the Blue Dogs. But for roughly the same reason I could never abide erstwhile-Republican Arlen Specter, their crass opportunism and ideological incoherence doesn't sit well with me. Whether its left-wing primary challengers or conservative Republicans who bring them down, I look forward to the day when the Blue Dogs will leave Congress to take up new hobbies, like macrame or competitive eating. With a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a lopsided 256-seat majority in the House, the Obama Democrats should be in a position to do anything they'd like. Yet as the president all but acknowledged last week, his agenda has stalled. It is now all but unimaginable that congressional Democrats will pass health-reform legislation before the August recess, thus giving opponents time to regroup and build their case to the American public. And Democrats have the Blue Dogs to thank, as Republicans watch gleefully from the sidelines.
Henry Waxman, arguably the most influential Democrat in the House and a canny legislative strategist, faced down the Blue Dogs on his Energy and Commerce Committee, threatening to do an end-run around them as they held a Democratic health bill hostage. Naturally, he later backed away, fully cognizant of the Blue Dogs' outsized strength. To start, the Blue Dogs had seven votes on the committee, eight if you count Jane Harman of California, who didn't join their mini-rebellion. But more broadly, the Blue Dogs enjoy tremendous influence because they make the Democrats a truly national party. Without them, Democrats would be overwhelmingly coastal and urban and culturally alien to the small and doughty band of Heartland swing voters who, for better or worse, soak up most of the attention in an election year.
In fairness, the Blue Dogs do have a number of decent ideas. For example, they want doctors in underserved rural areas to receive more compensation from Medicare than doctors in overserved urban areas, a measure that might help reduce costs over time by easing the severe overspending that some argue is caused by gluts of specialists.
Blue Dog guru Jim Cooper, a House Democrat from Tennessee best known until recently for killing President Clinton's health proposal and setting into motion over a decade of Republican Congressional dominance, has another excellent idea, one that should delight conservatives. He has championed a proposal that would create a new agency, the Independent Medicare Advisory Board, that would, like today's Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, recommend changes to the way Medicare works designed to reduce costs and raise quality. The difference is that IMAC would actually be able to put its recommendations into practice. Once the president signs off on IMAC's recommendations, they'd go into effect unless Congress voted to stop them. And if Congress does indeed vote to stymie IMAC, the president could then veto Congress. That basically means that Congress would need a two-thirds supermajority to resist the awesome power of IMAC. So what happens the next time there is a Republican president? That's right: even without a Congressional majority, conservatives will be able to remake the most vitally important entitlement program with little interference. I genuinely think that this would be a very good thing for the country, as I'm convinced that we need to radically transform Medicare into a more market-friendly, pro-growth system. But surely Democrats don't agree.
The Blue Dogs are also responsible for gutting the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill, which looks very likely to die in the Senate. Again, I think this is fantastic news, as the legislation was badly designed and it might even exacerbate the economic downturn. Yet President Obama was elected on a promise to take dramatic action against carbon emissions. In a sense, the Blue Dogs have made a liar out of the president. By allowing them to get away with such obstreperous behavior, the White House is developing a reputation for weakness. More devastatingly, the Blue Dogs are robbing Obama Democrats of momentum. One key advantage for the left is the sense that they are on the side of History, and that all who oppose them are doomed to go the way of the dodo. While Republicans worship Reagan, Democrats are on to the Next Big Thing. As the Obama agenda sputters and gasps, however, the right has an opportunity to look, well, progressive.
Slowly but surely, Republicans are regrouping. The party is having surprising success with candidate recruitment, while the Democrats are having a far tougher time. Though it's too early to predict a serious Republican comeback, it is entirely possible that the 19 Blue Dogs who defeated Republicans in 2006 and 2008 will return to the primordial ooze from whence they came. And they'll only have themselves to blame: had the Democrats stayed united, conservative could have been effectively marginalized. But through their constant inside-the-tent sniping, they've made the GOP look like the voice of sweet reason.
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Geithner's Stock Plummeting
Jeff Madrick is a contributor to the New York Review of Books and a former economics columnist for the New York Times. He is editor of Challenge Magazine, visiting professor of humanities at Cooper Union, and senior fellow at the New School's Schwartz Center for Economic Policy Analysis. He is the author of Taking America, The End of Affluence (Random House) and The Case for Big Government.
The GOP's New Hope?
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
Is Saving Karzai Worth U.S. Lives?
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
The Collateral Damage to Muslims
Reihan Salam is a fellow at the New America Foundation and the co-author of Grand New Party.
We will soon find out who these Blue Dogs really are. Do they care about the American people or about lining their pockets? I for one am not as charitable Paul Krugman was in today's Times. Nor are most of my friends in conservative Virginia. As you note I think they care more about the money for their 2010 and 2012 campaigns for re-election and future job prospects than health care. Can we shame them into doing the right thing? I doubt it. People like Senators Bayh and Landieu and Representatives like Mr. Ross do not care much what people think. They will do what is in their personal political and financial interest. But I will still write checks to every organization that will name names and expose them on their home turf in hopes they can be embarrassed a wee bit.
As to this bringing about a resurgence of the Republican Party, I do not think so. The Republicans I know here who voted for Obama or did not, have no desire to return to the party. Session, DeMint, Rush, and Newt have killed that chance. They are prime fodder for independents and Dem challengers, however.
Yes, obviously anybody who is against the health care package could only be doing it for selfish reasons.
johnjohnson68510
Pretty much. This industry is worth $2.3 Trillion annually to insurance and
pharma corporations. Do you think they are going to allow the general good
to take dominance when they've been actively siphoning off that kind of money
from the economy every year? Good guess. No, they're not. They're going to
scare everybody with false claims of 'socialism' and any other boogeymen
they can invent. People will do some pretty awful things when that kind of
dough is at stake.
Interesting you mention Senator Bayh. His wife sits on 4 boards that I know about. One is health insurance and the other three are PhARMA types.
Talk about 'sleeping with the enemy.'
Yes are they for change just to make Obama look like he is doing something or are they going to hold out for something that works?
A 2 party system means absolutely nothing when influence streams from the same filthy lobbyist river. (jdx please tell me this figure is exaggerated...please) 2.3 trillion a f*cking year? are you kidding me...? Whole nations have been carved up chewed and spit out for less. Do you realize essentially we (US citizens) are a cancer patient in a waiting room dying while insurance suits stand in the office debating about underwriting and tax exemptions.......pricks. Blue dogs red elephants purple jack asses who cares......do something legitimate for this country and her people before we wind up on a shelf right next to Egypt and Rome.
Holly shit our present government sucks monkey nuts.
"(jdx please tell me this figure is exaggerated...please) 2.3 trillion a f*cking year? are you kidding me...?"
Nope, no exaggeration. Well, not much of one. It's between $2.2 trillion and $2.3 trillion. 16% of our GDP. And that kind of money needs to buy us a hell of a lot more than it does.
Mr Salam: "As the Obama agenda sputters and gasps, however, the right has an opportunity to look, well, progressive. /.../had the Democrats stayed united, conservative could have been effectively marginalized. But through their constant inside-the-tent sniping, they've made the GOP look like the voice of sweet reason."
Uhm... yeah, that's why ALL of the 40 GOP senators voted for the insane F-22 plan. Sweet reason, indeed.
Conservatives like Mr. Salam give me a dim hope for our country. While I often don't agree with his politics, I do believe he comes from a place of good faith and that is all the difference. Too many players on both sides have gotten caught up in the "game" of politics - the back and forth and tit for tat power struggle has become the end and not the means.
Sadly, Mr. Salam is an exception and the rule still holds too much sway. If Republicans are elected in 2010, I believe their strategy will be to "go for the kill" where the president is concerned. This may be "good" for the party but it will be awful for the country.
In the end, I think we're a culture in decline and decay. Like all empires before us, we will lose our power and influence. The real question for me is, what will this inevitable descent cost the average American?
Poor legislation is done in a hurry, good legislation takes time...Truman
Poor legislation can be fixed later; good legislation will never be passed (it gives opponents too much time to stir up opposition).
Sometimes, even a bad decision is better than no decision.
Nancy Pelosi takes a lot of heat; much of it undeserved, but as a tough POL and one who knows her way around the Rotundra, she knows how to to handle the Blue Dog (better named Blue Weasel) Democrats. She will simply by pass their committee. What a bunch of stooges they are trying to shanghai the process over issues long debated and settled. I commend Nancy Pelosi, just bring the bill to the floor without them. She doesn't need their 10 stupid votes, and should punish them in future appropriations and committee assignments. The Blue Dogs are nothing but a bunch of disloyal and opportunistic bums.
Spoken like a like a true left wing looney, punish those that represent their constituents....crazy!
Johnnyappleseed: They are not representing their constituents (who overwhelmingly want health care reform). They represent their campaign contributors.
Johnnyappleseed
Their constituents have no one representing them. Their votes have been
bought and paid for several times over. Lobbies are spending $2.5 million
PER DAY to insure nothing changes in Washington. Their constituents
and the American people in general are just a dim memory.
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
AlanD2:
You think America "overwhelmingly" wants the kind of reform Obama is offering up? Check the polls again.
The Blue Dogs are not trying to stop health care reform altogether. They just want to be part of the discussion of what goes into the health care bill, and so far, Pelosi, Waxman, and the liberal Democrats have shut out anyone who doesn't want exactly what they want. They have refused to compromise, foolishly believing that they have enough votes to pass the bill without bipartisan support, and they don't. So naturally, they point the finger at those who oppose them and claim they don't support reform, which is categorically untrue. They support honest, helpful, effective, NECESSARY reform. Not ludicrous reform that puts the entire health care industry under the government umbrella. You want socialism, move to Canada. America is a capitalist democracy. Live with it or get the hell out.
Blue Weasels - I like that. Weasels are quite greedy and will kill a whole coop of chickens even if they can only eat one. The Blue Weasels are selling America out to the insurance companies. Shame on them.
Does anyone with an ideological opinion actually
care what SPECIFIC provisions are in the bill ?
Or is the argument based strictly on political affiliation ?
How about the idea that so-called "Blue Dogs" MIGHT oppose
the healthcare bill because PARTS of it MIGHT be irresponsible ?
Maybe they actually READ THE BILL.
Wouldn't that be a novel idea for Politicians.
sophia5
The bill hasn't been written yet. So reading it would be difficult. The
insurance lobbies are paying millions to help write the bill. That's what
we're all objecting to. No one is actually representing YOU, or me or
the American public. Ideology be damned.
They read the bill and oppose it on two fronts focused on the Public Option and raising taxes to pay for the legislation. The first major argument being no benefit payments for abortions under any circumstance which are paid for by tax payers. This is a red herring for three reasons. The first reason being the law of land extending the right to choose to women under certain circumstances. People may disagree about this based on theological principles or secular principles, but it is the law. As such, these services are currently covered under Medicaid. The second reason is that almost every state law require employers to provide coverage on a nondiscriminatory basis, as does federal law, and as a result reasonable reproductive coverage is provided which includes benefits for termination of pregnancy under certain conditions. The third reason, given the first two reasons is that virtually anyone who pays taxes, or is covered under an employer sponsored plan is paying for these services as part of a larger coverage pool. Finally the so called blue dog / weasel democrats are opposed to the public option. Why? The writers above have it right, special interests. United Healthcare, operating regionally in the United States, reported a 2 billion dollar health care profit last quarter. This is 2 billion dollars of profit on top of the profit made by the drug companies, medical device manufacturers, physicians, and all the other players in the health care field. Come on! To suggest a public option is bad, is to say affordable, comprehensive coverage for every American isn't really necessary! We need to get a grip on the escalating costs, allow people who have a health issue to live with peace and dignity, and have a market place that competes fairly, which is best achieved through a public option. If you dont want the public option, choose a private carrier. At least you will have a choice, whcih unfortunately, many in this country don't. Maybe you should read more...
Just to clarify, there are three bills working through the system. The Senate
health, education, labor and pensions approved a bill this month. Two House
committees have approved bills, a third is still in progress. The Senate Finance committee is also working on one. We're still a long way from a
'Health Care Bill'.
In what way (s) is the Obama health care initiative "misconceived", as you posit?
The biggest problem the United States has is the overt corruption of it's
Congress. The Blue Dog's bowls are being swamped with cash by the insurance and pharmaceutical companies who will not allow their 2.3 trillion
dollar parasitic racketeering to fold. The Blue Dogs are the ones who will let
them continue to feed at the trough. And the United States will stay number
37 in the world ranking of health care quality. This is not a Democracy,
it's a corporate oligarchy.
well said
Heresay, they just are thinkers that are looking at the issue on sustainability, cost, who pays, who will get access, but more importantly will it end up like medicare, medicaid, and the social security.....broke.
Johnnyappleseed: The insurance, pharmaceutical, and health care industries are spending ten million dollars a week on lobbyists to defeat health care.
I doubt that the recipients of this legal bribery are very concerned about sustainability, costs, who pays, and who will get access.
I suspect that they are much more concerned about who gets reelected.
Sustainability? Our current System has grown at nearly 10 times the rate of inflation, we now spend more than twice per capita what the other industrialized countries of the World spend, yet the only areas the U.S. ranks #1 is teen pregnancy, Obesity and Plastic Surgery!!! For spending twice as much we are nothing but Average in Cancer, heart Disease, Diabetes, Life Expectancy etc. How is that spiraling cost growth sustainable?
Actually Medicare and Medicaid are FAR from broke and have sutained themselves quite nicely in handling the medical needs of nearly 80M poor and elderly Americans! Social Security is merely broke because Reagan began the cycle we are in today of borrowing from the funds to pay for his tripling of the deficit...
So Johnny, to use a simple analogy, America is turning it's back on the $30K Honda Accord, to spend $60K on a Chrysler Sebring. Personally I still purchase American cars, but even I wouldn't take that deal....
And the supporters of this bill aren't being lobbied? #1 contributing group to Pelosi - Health care.
Abolish lobbying. Public finance of all elections. Eliminate the electoral college (not the academic ones damnit!). Paper trail votes.
FNYGY1- dim hope indeed. What price will the Americans pay? We'll go down with the ship (and take the rest of the world with us).
Oh yeah- and tax the rich to death, if you wish to avoid this fate America! Wake up!
Tipping point close or passed, we probably won't even know until it's too late.
But it worth fighting for people- this is the WORLD, not just America, that's hanging (by a thread) in the balance.
most people in congress are preening. the ones most preening at nancy pelosi - she of international gravitas who hails her accomplishments towards peace in syria while they snicker behind her back, and jack murtha, who happily is stealing the money of all of us - or at least of generations to come. actually, preening in itself is relatively harmless compared to the underlying issue. in this case, the health care bill is a fundamental disaster. if mr obama is "serious" it would come with the tort reform that he and other lawyers just can't abide. instead, it is not even mentioned.
Good point, and include for Pelosi TART reform.
Johnnyappleseed: I'm sure that all the readers here are going to be converted by your personal attacks.
Johnnyappleseed
You're not even making sense. Pelosi is every bit as corrupt as the rest of
them. They all belong to the party of money. You need to stop the mindless
name calling and realize that your buddy Rush is a corporate shill also.
My District is represented by a Blue Dog and I am glad. His opinions are very close to my own, which tend to be more fiscally conservative than the Democratic party.
There you go... valid point! but the liberal loonies don't get that point...your representative representing you the folks that elected him.
Nice comment..
So some of the million dollars a day the for-profits are reportedly spending are not ending up in your rep's pocket?
I don't understand all this fuss about paying for the health care plan, when the 'conservatives' on both sides never said a word about the billions or trillions that have been spent on these two unnessessary wars. I would rather "waste" money on our own people than on wars! Until you talk about this, you have no argument about the health care plan.
Exactly.
Did that thought not burn while idiots were demonstrating with their teabags?
SCMax101: The majority of Americans want health care reform, even in red states (which are the ones usually represented by blue dogs). What makes you think that your views match those of your district?
Are you willing to continue to let 22,000 uninsured Americans die every year?
What do you expect when the democratic party accepts members like Lieberman and Specter?
Yes I know Lieberman was finally kicked out by the state party members but Obama still let Lieberman keep his leadership position.
Just one more example of why without drastic campaign finance reform our democracy is becoming more and more of an illusion.
Obama's health care plan has little credibility, other than from the loon left. The reason it has little credibility is because this congress and president already have a reputation for passing laws they have not read.
I am with an earlier commenter. Pass tort reform first. Whittle, don't wack. It's too big of a project to ram through.
useburners: If you knew much about Congress, you would know that congressional members rarely if ever read any of the laws that they pass (or reject). That's what staffers are for.
Tort reform would affect less than 1% of health care costs. At that rate, it would take forever to whittle. I'm for whacking.
Many of the Blue Dogs are just old-fashioned Dixiecrats running under a new label, but with the same mentality--pro-business and anti-labor, as they always were. We used to have a lot more of them in the Democratic Party, but the majority went over to the Republicans years ago, thank God. These are the people we have to run AGAINST, after all, not FOR.
Dixiecrats have no problem giving away trillions to big banks and corporations, and in that are like Republicans. It's only when Congress is really considering a program that might help the ordinary person that all of a sudden there's a huge problem.
I've pretty much given up on health care reform at the federal level in any case. I knew exactly what would happen months ago and said so. There would be a lot of money against it if it included any kind of public option, and the Republicans and Dixiecrats would block it,as they always have in the past.
We progressives learned a lot time ago that the South was the big obstacle to any kind of reform in America, which is why I wish Texas and some of these other Deep South states really would leave the Union. They have no power to shape the national agenda, but always just enough power to block anything that the other sections want, so the system will continue to be very corrupt and dominated by corporate interests.
The BlueDog Democrats are really Republicans and don't belong in the democratic party. Like MCMCHUGH99 said, they are just the Dixiecrats, and with that kind of mentality.
Sure kick em under the buss... and kiss your majority goodbye and your president too. Who do you think the people in those swing states are?
If it turns out that the reason healthcare reform failed is these democratic blue-dogs, then they can kiss their careers good-bye. The American people are fed-up and sick over this "greed above all else" policy that so many in our Congress adhere to. Congress has become the stumbling block to any policy that would benefit Americans in general, instead becomes what favors whichever industry has the most bucks. What we shouldn't forget though is that our collective voices are more ferocious than all the money the insurance industry has, and none of us should hold back. Call or write every elected official's office and demand that you be heard.
to those would want national health care: this is the result of a major political error driven by ego from the pelosi and waxman sector of the country. the previous chairman of the house energy and commerce committee was rep. dingell, who strongly supports national health care, and has great respect and cooperation from the blue dog democrats. when waxman and other democrats wanted to make a statement against the auto industry and by a slim margin removed dingell from his position as chair, they essentially killed the chance or cooperation from the blue dog democrats. waxman and the democratic party was warned that if waxman became chair of energy, national health care would be extremely difficult.
Wanting health care reform does not equal wanting Socialized Medicine.
Any government action will be tinkering with the free market which is by definition socialistic. Isn't it a given that the free market is not taking care of this problem? You just can't make a profit giving some people health insurance at an affordable rate.
Then I hope you're against subsidies to farmers, miners, oil companies and the like. You should also be in favor of a free market Army and Navy, inasmuch as the government tinkers far too much with them. Certainly we shouldn't provide the miltary with health care, since that too is another socialist encroachment. What about free enterprise highway, bridges and tunnels?
Playing both sides isn't being wish-washy as the hardliners like to sceam when the non-ideologs aren't falling in line. It's smart politics. Historically, they have more influence over elections and policy than either the right wing or left wing.
Though I normally consider Reihan Salam to be very much a preening bozo, here he has finally made a decent & coherent argument about something.
He is still one of the biggest clowns in the "serious" right-wing commentary universe, but he is right about the Blue Dogs. I am appalled by what they are doing, and genuinely surprised.
Perfectly said, Rdschenkel. This country has fallen into a permanent habit of arguing from false premises. 'You don't like Obama? You are a racist!' 'You don't agree with the invasion of Iraq? You are a cowardly traitor!' In our current pursuit of the Orwellian ideal we allow ourselves to be continuously manipulated in bizarre ways, including defending/attacking points of view that really aren't ours but rather part of partisan packages we are expected to accept without question.
I for one completely believe in the need for health reform starting with tort reform and serious restrictions on pharmacuetical product marketing which does nothing but creat new classes of hypochondriacs. I also believe if you want to permantently cripple an area of public interest, give it over to the federal government. Just look at the decline in education since the creation of the Department of Education at the Cabinet level for the most obvious example.
We should all stop allowing the politicians to tell us what we should want and start telling them what we actually need. Because even though various citizens may define those needs differently it would be a far healthier (intended) debate if our representatives were forced to voice the will of their constituents rather than of their lobbyists.
"Reform" of the medical care system, as conceived by the Democratic Party leadership, poses a fundamental threat to our freedom and our welfare.
If "insuring the uninsured" is the point of this, as the president and the Speaker claim, that could be achieved inexpensively and without a takeover of this major economic sector by the federal government.
If the Blue Dogs are all that stand between us and this attempted putsch by the Left, then we need all the bozos we can get.
Many of the "Blue Dog Democrats" come from very wealthy districts. They were elected by their well-heeled constituents because the rich couldn't stand the stink and incompetence of the Republicans anymore.
The Blue Dogs are being lobbied very hard by the Insurance Companies, but their greatest fear is that their rich constituents might have to lose their special tax deductions and take a standard deduction like the rest of us.
So the vast majority will be hoisted, once again, on the petard of privilege for the rich.
Max Baucas (Blue Dog) has accepted over one million dollars from the health care industry...Mitch McCOnnell (R) has accepted more than Baucas. Baucas is holding up the vote in his health care committee and McConnell is saying the R's will NEVER vote for a public option. It will cut the profits of insurance companies. Of course, the two good senators won't admit that's the reason, but there you go.
These "bozos" are not acting on principal they are in the pocket of the powers that be, ins. companies, pharmas, AMA, hospitals, etc. We need some rich Democrats to go to these people and assure them of replacement of contributions should they vote for the American people and not against them. Look at how much Bachus has received.
Let me understand something, here. You refer to these, to use your words, opportunistic, money-grubbing, ideologically incoherent "prening bozos" but you support them? You say you can not abide by Arlen Spector and his politics, compare them to him, and in the end, you are rooting for them. What is up with that???
If we can't pass this legislation for reform with a super majority. I predict the end of the democratic party. The amount of money we have given the banks and insurance companies could support health care for years to come. This country is totally screwed up. I can't believe I served our country so these idiots could screw up this opportunity to join the human race. Shameful!
For those against nationalized health care: Please leave your names and addresses on this site so that I can send my health care bills to you, especially after I'm dropped by my insurance carrier because of a "pre-existing" condition (namely, of making the mistake of actually getting sick in America).
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.