I have often remembered this article by David Sirota from 2006. He laid out the differences so clearly. Of course Bernie Sanders was in the People Party, just like he is today.
The placement of Hillary Clinton at that time was "Unclear Which Way She Leans".
The names have changed in some instances, some no longer in office. Overall, this is a good clear article about where most stand on issues and why.
Really like his point about our nation's politics divided not so much between parties as between people vs money.
People Party vs. Money Party: Who's Who Among the Democrats
The fact that our nation's politics is divided not between Democrats and Republicans but between the People Party and the Money Party is obvious to anyone who looks at the political system honestly (which is to say, not most journalists or Washington political hacks). Calls for "bipartisanship" and faux "centrism" that has nothing to do with the actual center of American public opinion are most often moves to prevent the political debate from analyzing the People vs. Money divide that actually fuels our politics. We already have plenty of "bipartisanship" -- Republicans and a faction of Democrats who regularly join hands to screw over the vast majority of Americans.
Many people ask me who? Who are the leading members of both sides of the actual divide? The answer is that there is no official list because no one is forced to formally declare their allegiance to the People Party or the Money Party. But it is fairly obvious which lawmakers in the new majority have specifically defined themselves on economic justice issues.
A little about the People Party:
People Party Leaders
Freshman Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jon Tester (D-MT) and Jim Webb (D-VA): This is the core group of economic populists who defined the larger populist trend in the 2006 election. Brown has a long record in the House as an economic justice champion, as has Sanders (who I worked for years ago). Tester (pictured above from an event he did here in Helena last night) made his campaign about cleaning up K Street corruption, and Webb has declared that his top issue is going to be addressing the taboo issue of economic inequality.
There are many more named. Bernie Sanders has lived up to that label of being for the people just as he did through the years.
The Money Party People:
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD): All three of these men, now in leadership positions, have made very little effort to conceal that they answer to Big Money interests. Schumer, for instance, recently trumpeted a new report calling for post-Enron corporate reforms to be gutted. Emanuel was the architect of NAFTA who used the prospect of his being in the majority on the Ways and Means Committee to suck corporate cash out of Wall Street. Hoyer bragged on his website about starting his own K Street Project, and, as I documented in Hostile Takeover, one of his top legislative staffers serves simultaneously as an official for his corporate fundraising operation -- 'nuff said.
Can't list them all, but I mostly find myself agreeing with Sirota. He also list some names and tells and which he thinks they lean. Disagreed on a couple of them.
His statement about Hillary Clinton:
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) -- Unclear Which Way She Leans: Clinton has not really tried to define her public image on economic issues -- and it is unclear where her real loyalties are. Her views on lobbyist-written trade deals is completely unclear, especially considering her ties to a Clinton White House that championed the very "free" trade policies that sold out American workers. Similarly, whereas her efforts in the 1990s to enact universal health care were motivated by a desire to represent the People Party, a report in the New York Times a few months ago showed that Clinton is now the number two recipient of health care industry cash and is returning the favor by publicly apologizing for her original health care reform efforts. Meanwhile, she this year headlined the DLC's national conference -- a very public rebuke of the People Party.
I think the public images of both are far more clearly defined now as far as their funding and their loyalties.
