There are now 3 quadrillion diaries on this site bemoaning the role of Blue Dog Democrats in the House health care debate. But what I find interesting is the little-discussed role of a second tier of party agitators, the Brown Dogs.
Let me explain...
The Blue Dogs have 40 or 50 declared members. Of these, 20 to 25 voted both for the Stupak-Pitts Amendment and against the overall health care bill.
And, given the already watered-down nature of the health care bill, it is questionable whether these fiscally and socially conservative, mostly-Southern Democrats would have voted for any health care bill.
So, to me, these Democrats are predictable and largely uninteresting. The Brown Dogs, however, are much more intriguing...
Before I discuss further, here is a list of the 64 Democratic members of the House who voted for the Stupak Amendment with home states, courtesy Media Blades:
Vote Lists with States: Stupak Amendment/Final Bill
The link also includes a list of the 26 Democrats who voted against the final bill.
If one looks at the 39 Democrats who voted both for the Stupak Amendment and the final bill, the majority come from the Midwest. States like Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Minnesota, Indiana and Pennsylvania are heavy with this second tier of Democratic objectors.
What do these states have in common? Most have heavy Catholic populations. This explains the importance of the Stupak Amendment. But it would be unfair to call these places culturally conservative. Half of these states do not have the death penalty. Michigan has a medicinal marijuana law. Places like Minnesota and Michigan have long histories of conservation and environmental protection. Most have school systems, hospitals, library networks and other public infrastructure that are the envy of other states.
In many ways, the abortion debate was a premature introduction to these brown dogs. Social issues are really not what make these representatives tick. It is economics that are of core importance. And this is the reason why these representatives eventually voted for the bill. The bill will greatly help the working-class populations of the Midwest. As an economic issue, health care is a no-brainer.
And one only needs look at Marcy Kaptur of Ohio to see an example of a representative for whom working class economics are the core operating principle. Her impassioned plea on the House floor against the bank bailouts still dazzles me. There is a lot of desperation out there. And I would argue that no one feels it more fully than these Midwestern Brown Dogs.
And, in fact, there were many Midwestern Democrats of similar mindset who voted for the health care bill without reservation. I am most familiar with John Dingell and Mark Schauer of Michigan. Dingell comes from a heavily Catholic district. Schauer's district is more Protestant, but still quite religious and socially conservative. Still, both voted for the bill without supporting the Stupak Amendment.
In fact, I would argue that the extent of this de facto "Brown Dog Coalition" is probably twice the size of the 30 to 40 that voted for Stupak and also for the entire bill. Most ignored the Stupak Amendment because social issues are really not their reason for existing in Washington.
While these representatives do not officially work together as a block, there have certainly been times in which they have come together as a cohesive unit. The most prominent examples were the auto bailouts and the Cash for Clunkers bills.
And when the final votes came down, it wasn't really the Blue Dogs who passed the health care bill in the House. A majority of Blue Dogs voted against it.
No. It was the Brown Dogs who provided the margin.
Now, why is this important?
It is my belief that the health care bill was a relatively easy vote for congressional Brown Dogs. Again, abortion and other social issues are only side issues when compared to working class economics.
Much upcoming legislation, most notably the climate bill, will be MUCH more difficult. Understanding of this element of the Democratic majority will be essential to passage of any climate bill. And, let's be honest. The climate bill has zero chance of passing without these Midwest industrial Democrats.
But these are also the Democrats on which a broad majority can be built in 2010 and in the future. These Democrats can be won with an agenda that is focused on economics that support the working class, manufacturing, fair trade, brownfield rehabilitation, education and home state economic diversification.
It really is the economy, stupid. And the health care bill is a good start. But it really is just a start.