Five issues Democrats intend to run on in 2006 -- and one glaring omission
Joe Klein interviews Rep. Rahm Emmanuel for Time Magazine.
I like Emmanuel, and not just because I recently read that he was the real-life model for the character of The West Wing's Josh Lyman. Emmanuel is what Klein calls a "happy warrior," i.e., he's an enthusiastic guy who revels in what he does and is willing to fight for what he believes in.
He is also the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the organization responsible for getting more Democrats elected to Congress (Chuck Schumer is his counterpart for the Senate).
Here are five issues that Emmanuel is focusing on for the mid-term elections next year:
Not a bad list, although I'd like to see something stronger on health care, something more like Kennedy's "Medicare for all.""And then you gotta have a reform piece," Emanuel hydrofoiled. "Actually, that should come first. Clean up the relationship between lobbyists and legislators, same way we did donors and candidates. This place is a cesspool—gotta address the gifts, free trips, the revolving-door lobbying jobs for staff members."
- Expand support for higher education.
"Make college as universal in the 21st century as high school was in the 20th"; three out of four jobs in the new, high-tech economy require two years or more of higher education.- Create a National Institute of Science and Engineering, like the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Funding for the nih has quadrupled since the 1980s, from $7 billion to $28 billion. "That's why we lead in pharmaceuticals and medical technology." Funding for science has been stagnant—about $5 billion—during that period. "I'd quadruple it and concentrate on nanotechnology, broadband and energy."- Promote energy independence.
Reduce foreign oil by 50% in 10 years. Create a hybrid economy. Use government contracts and tax incentives to boost solar and wind power.- Provide health care vouchers.
"I'm not afraid of vouchers"—for use in the health insurance system that covers federal employees. Basic coverage, nothing fancy.- Organize a bipartisan summit on the budget.
Balance it. Everything on the table—loopholes, pork, Bush tax cuts.
Conspicuous by its absence is a bullet point on national security and more specifically on Iraq. Emmanuel (and DCCC mastermind Nancy Pelosi) have taken a lot of heat from the grassroots on this point because, while polls show that overall support for the war has fallen dramatically among all segments of the electorate, the DCCC has been wishy-washy on the issue. The closest I've heard Emmanuel come to a statement on Iraq is when he said this on MTP:
Congress has an obligation to hold a standard. We have given the president a blank check. It's been a rubber-stamp Congress that sent troops in there without Kevlar vests, without Humvees. We have to have a standard in which Iraq and the administration measure up over the two years, and at that point we'll evaluate where we are.I'm the last guy qualified to lecture Emmanuel about political tactics, but in the world of "us vs. them," how does this distinguish the Democrats from the Republicans?
Here's the thing: If you go into a restaurant and the menu has two items -- "A Cheeseburger" and "Another Cheeseburger" -- you're going to order "A Cheeseburger" every time.
Did you see Saturday Night Live last night?
The Hardball skit was a riot and so spot on it was a bit scary. Yeah, the administration sucks pretty bad right now, but if the Dems don't do something, anything...they are screwed.
One more thing, the Dems need to do more than point fingers. They need to come up with solutions. It's not enough to cry about Republicans being wrong or evil, they need to give people a reason to believe in them again.
The Dems need to do more than point fingers. They need to come up with solutions.
Damn, Rose. Didn't you just finish reading the post that you're commenting on?
Yes, I did. I'd like to see the elected officials do it, not just appointed chairmen say it.
Um, no.
Isn't the very definition of this debacle that there are: NO. GOOD. OPTIONS.?
Isn't that exactly what most Democrats (including me) and a number of Republicans warned the warmongers about in the run-up to invading Iraq? “You will open a political Pandora’s box that will be impossible to control and may well lead to worse consequences than the Ba’athists”.
Democrats lead the successful effort to contain Saddam and destroy his WMD capability. That was their Iraq policy and now we’re living – and dying – with the Republicans’.
This new Republican/MSM meme begging the question of Democrats, "how are you going to get us out of this mess" is ridiculous on its face and, with Democrats completely excluded from policy making by Republicans, about as dumb a frame I would expect the electorate to fall for.
Obviously, Democrats will have to offer voters their plan for Iraq. But the time to do that will be next year. Events are likely to overtake any present plan, as they have all along (please see above).
Obviously, Democrats will have to offer voters their plan for Iraq. But the time to do that will be next year.
So, what do you figure the Dems are suppoosed to do in Congress? Didn't they get hired to do a job as well?
"So, what do you figure the Dems are suppoosed to do in Congress? Didn't they get hired to do a job as well?"
Of course they did. And it's a job the Republicans have prevented them from doing since taking control of the Congress.
So Democrats should do exactly what now? Propose the administration's Iraq and terrorism policy while Dick Cheney publicly tries to strong arm permission to torture captives? Feh.
Dems are supposed to do just what Republicans did when they were in the minority under Clinton: provide the loyal opposition.
Dems are supposed to do just what Republicans did when they were in the minority under Clinton: provide the loyal opposition.
The Republicans worked with Clinton to pass some reforms and balance the budget. They were not the minority under Clinton for long...1994 the Republicans took over. Did you forget that?
How could I forget? Reforming government and balanced budgets, those sound like wonderful things don't they?
And then, after the Gingrich revolution, there was impeachment (while we were being attacked by Al Qaeda) for refusing to admit to an illicit blowjob.
Ah, Republicans. Leading the way on bi-partisan cooperation in times of war.
“Mr. Warner said he decided to take the Democratic proposal and edit it to his satisfaction in an effort to find common ground between the parties on the issue.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/politics/15cong.html
Happy now, Rosemary?