That's currently the Democratic Party in the simplest form. Everyone knows it but few understand what it really means and the impact it has on on what folks call "sausage making" legislation.
Republicans, for instance, are at the opposite extreme of where we find ourselves. For all intends and purposes, they're a "regional" party and are closer to attaining that elusive ideological purity than we're.
The current Democratic Party is made up of Progressives, Liberals, Moderates, and Blue Dogs. With some exceptions, you can actually pinpoint geographically where most of them come from:
- Progressives = New England and West Coast
- Liberals = same as above, Rust Belt
- Moderates = Mountain
- Blue Dogs = South
To a degree, I'm oversimplifying to make a point but please keep following my post.
Having a "Big Tent" Party is both a curse and a blessing. A blessing because we have a true majority so there will be some legislation that will gain majority support and pass without much debate or pushback from either side. A curse because some legislation such as Cap-and-Trade and Healthcare Reform will take more compromise than either of the Democratic Party factions (e.g. Progressives vs. Blue Dogs) would like.
Unfortunately, for either of these two factions neither has a overwhelming majority to pass the legislation that they really want or prefer. Progressives need Blue Dogs as much as Blue Dogs need Progressives, especially in the House. You need 218 in the House to pass a bill. Democrats don't have 218 Progressives to pass a bill with a robust Public Plan. That's the reality, so remember this fact.
Under the current Healthcare Reform debate we find ourselves in a "pickle." One group wants a robust Public Option, while the other prefers a Co-Op or something different than a Public Option. From an outsiders' perspective, neither group is right or wrong; both groups represent different geographic areas and demographics that have a different reaction to Healthcare reform.
I've been following closely some of the town halls that CNN.com/Live has been streaming. I watched two in particular that caught my attention: Rep. Mike Ross, leader of the Blue Dogs Coalition and Rep. Allen Boyd, another Blue Dog from northern Florida. I was actually impressed at how they both handled, in their own unique way, the town hall format and Q&A. There was some shouting but not the rowdy type that we've seen on cable news lately.
My biggest take away from both town hall meetings was how different folks from those Congressional Districts are from folks in Washington, DC, for example, which is where I live. It's really hard for me to understand why they feel the way they feel and the crazy ideas they come up with. Some of them mentioned that they actually took the time to read all 1,000 pages of the H.R. 230 Healthcare reform bill. I doubt however that they actually understood the language; some actually focused on a couple of pages -- I'm assuming that someone is sending them specific passages from those bills without any context -- to make their point.
But the basic take away is that these folks from those Congressional Districts are active but badly informed. Some here would say that if presented with facts, they would change the tone and maybe support the idea of Healthcare Reform. But I highly doubt that. These folks are just not trusting of anything that government does or can do. There is no level reasoning that can be done. Period.
This brings us back to some of the arguments that I've been reading around here lately. Some want the Blue Dogs to go away while asking the Progressives to take a stronger stand and force their bill through the House. Some are blaming Rahm Emmanuel for recruiting Blue Dogs. Some are saying that they should start recruiting true Progressives to run against these Blue Dogs. Anyway, you get the idea.
Any reasonable person knows that it doesn't work that way. Blue Dogs represent Congressional Districts that tend to be more conservative. There not enough Progressives or Liberals in Mike Ross' District to elect someone else. Like there are not enough Moderates or Conservatives in Nancy Pelosi's District to elect a Blue Dog. That's just the reality and something that we need to accept and live with...it is what it is.
So how do we legislate?
Unfortunately there is no easy answer. Do we stick to the Public Option and "force" unwilling Blue Dogs to back the legislation? Do we consider the Co-Op and force Progressives to back it? Do we approach this dilemma as a "do or die" or "all or nothing" option?
Ultimately, I don't think healthcare reform is an all or nothing option. We can accomplish something and make gradual changes which is much easier to legislate. We did this with Medicare and Social Security and we can do it with the current debate. I think any reasonable person here would agree with this idea rather than completely scraping healthcare reform.
We need to stop blaming Blue Dogs or anyone we think is standing on the way of healthcare reform because they're not. I listened to Reps. Mike Ross and Allen Boyd and both want Healthcare Reform; they just don't support the Public Option...at least the version that's being sold to the American public by Healthcare opponents.
We also need to stop thinking that electing more Progressives from Conservative Districts is going to resolve all of our problems because there aren't many Progressives living in Conservative Districts, unless we start relocating them there -- that was a joke.
We have a majority in both Houses. But we don't have ideological purity and I don't think anyone here would promote that within the Democratic Party, otherwise we would end up looking like the Republican Party. I want the Democrats to continue to dominate both houses but we also need to adjust to the reality that we do have a "Big Tent" Party that houses a variety of opinions and represents a variety of demographics and that's the price I'm willing to pay for keeping those Republicans at bay.