Today, however, Republicans fit into a much narrower band of ideologies. In fact, Newt Gingrich, a onetime leader of the conservative wing of the party, is now on the moderate side of his party. Anyone to the left of Gingrich is considered an America-hating communist — particularly Dede Scozzafava, a moderate Republican in upstate New York whose campaign was sunk by hardline conservative activists.
It’s all well and good that conservative activists want to elect politicians who reflect their beliefs. What they’ve created, though, is a monster — a Republican party that votes en masse against any bill sponsored by a Democrat, that’s more interested in fire-breathing political gamesmanship than participating in the legislative process. And the truly amazing thing is, it’s going to get worse.
Doug Hoffman, the Conservative Party candidate who upended the race in New York’s 23rd District, is just the tip of the iceberg. Right-wing extremists have big plans for replacing Republican to the left of Glenn Beck with “real” conservatives.
…Grass-roots activists are ready to turn their fire on Republicans in a host of races across the country, said Adam Brandon, a spokesman for FreedomWorks, an organization that helped gin up the tea party protests and town hall flare-ups.
…
“There are going to be other conflicts,” said Brandon. “We have a lot of work to do. The [Doug] Hoffman campaign was the beginning. It was not the climax.” [Politico]
On the bright side, this internal battle is going to make a mess of the 2010 election cycle for Republicans, who could have had a pretty good year in 2010. On the not-so-bright side, it’s going to mean even less cooperation from Republicans in Congress over the next year, if that’s even possible. Republicans will remember what happened to Scozzafava, and toe the conservative line lest someone challenge them, too.
I’m sure that will strike hardline conservatives as major progress. The funny thing, though, is that in the long run this scorched-earth strategy is likely to do major damage to the Republican party. That’s what Gingrich warned conservatives about after Scozzafava withdrew from the race:
If we get into a cycle where every time one side loses, they run a third-party candidate, we’ll make Pelosi speaker for life and guarantee Obama’s re-election
Here’s the thing: Hoffman will almost undoubtedly win the election in NY-23. But that doesn’t mean Republicans should look to NY-23 as a model for purging what moderation remains in the party. It’s easy to squelch individualism in a district that hasn’t voted Republican for a century; in other districts, it’s going to lead to a spate of conservative losses. And as much as I’d love to see some conservative losses, I’d also love to see a political environment where extremists on the right don’t have a vice-like grip on the Republican party.
Nice post, and I entirely agree.
The Moderate Republican still exists among the citizenry, and in large numbers. They just don't happen to be supported by either party right now when it comes to campaigns and elections.
They don't have a home. A Moderate Republican probably doesn't see eye-to-eye with Eric Cantor (I choose to use actual elected leaders as my example than an entertainer like Glen Beck), but he/she also knows that the tent is a little to big on the left when you'd be signing up to support a Congressional delegation led by Nancy Pelosi.
DtM, your blather about Speaker of the House Pelosi is new. This is from her web site:
As a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, Pelosi fought for America's families. She has been a leader in increasing educational opportunity, protecting workers, and promoting health care, including women's health and the creation of a nationwide health tracking network to examine the links between environmental pollutants and chronic disease. She has been a strong proponent of increased investments in health research, and has secured funding to double the budget for the National Institutes of Health. Pelosi also has successfully defeated repeated attempts to reduce funding for international family planning programs.
So which camp are you in specifically, the anti-women's health camp or the pro-industrial pollutant camp?
Anyway, back to the topic. Moderate Republicans do have a home, it's the Republican Party. All moderates have to do is grow some stones and take back their party. As a liberal who aches to see a strong opposition party that will work to bring out the best in both political philosophies, please take back your party.
DtM, your blather about Speaker of the House Pelosi is new. This is from her web site:
As a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, Pelosi fought for America's families. She has been a leader in increasing educational opportunity, protecting workers, and promoting health care, including women's health and the creation of a nationwide health tracking network to examine the links between environmental pollutants and chronic disease. She has been a strong proponent of increased investments in health research, and has secured funding to double the budget for the National Institutes of Health. Pelosi also has successfully defeated repeated attempts to reduce funding for international family planning programs.
So which camp are you in specifically, the anti-women's health camp or the pro-industrial pollutant camp?
Anyway, back to the topic. Moderate Republicans do have a home, it's the Republican Party. All moderates have to do is grow some stones and take back their party. As a liberal who aches to see a strong opposition party that will work to bring out the best in both political philosophies, please take back your party.
yeah…remember when Democrats used to be moderate and didn’t kick people like Joe Lieberman out of the party?
Oh please. CT is way more liberal and Democratic than NY-23 is conservative and Republican. Obama actually won NY-23 by 5% so this whole, cant have a moderate Republican is ridiculous.
The "winner take all" mentality is killing civil dialogue in today's politics. It was bad before, but really became terrible around the time of Terri Schaivo.
Our public servants are more and more representing the base of their parties. They come from relatively insular circles, are made through an endorsement process, and reflect a group of partisan activitists and generally not the consituencies.
The moderate republicans are relics. Blue Dogs are next.
I support three things that could help curb this: 1) Encouraging candidates to take it to the primary instead of "abide" by an endorsement, 2) Further campaign finance reform to better enable point #1, and 3) Term limits. Let candidates emerge from the citizenry and have their turn to contribute to the direction of our state and country. And then let it happen again. And again.
I can't see the "winner take all" mentality leaving the Republican Party anytime soon unless the current set of radicals were to form a new party. Alternatively, moderate former Republicans could organize something new. This is what happened to Minnesota Democrats in the 1920s when the Famer-Labor Party became the progressive choice.
You're unfamilliae with McCarthy?
If you want to know where all the Liberal Republicans went, just look on the left side of the aisle in Congress. They have D's before their names now, and are commonly referred to as "Conservative Democrats." Same political beliefs and general ideology (geographical influences notwithstanding), just a different party.
Where have you gone, Nelson Rockefeller?
And they have been heavily criticized on this blog for not simply going along with health insurance reform. Makes me wonder how welcome they are during crunch time like this.
Like Lieberman, who, in 2006, campaigned on UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE?
And you wonder why we're critical of him. He is a lying opportunist
The only liberal republican in the 109th congress got his ass handed to him by Sheldon Whitehouse. The only other liberals currently in the senate are Al Franken and Bernie Sanders.
Democrats mock the lack of moderate Republicans and then do what? Attack moderate Democrats….
Have a nice election day tomorrow. I know I will!
Bingo!
Again, show me one single conservative democrat who has faced party sanctions for voting their conscience. We can grouse about them, but they are still in the party.
I wonder if Klobuchar is next, to be the target to Democratic ire. She is being decidedly more thoughtful and cautious about health reform than Franken. I'm sure he is earning praise among the base.
I, for one, respect Klobuchar's approach. She is representing Minnesotans, who are very cautious about healthcare reform and have a better health system than what hte desired outcomes of health reform would yeild. We also do it at a lower cost than everyone else. Should we normalize to the mean? No. We should be allowed to innovate like we have in the past. Thanks, Klobuchar.
Also, anyone else see what the current version of healthcare reform would mean to Minnesota? The $30 billion of taxes on the medical device industry? Did you know the Twin Cities has a highest concentration of medical device knowledge workers of any place in the USA? Any Senator from Minnesota who is not fighting that tax has chosen the Democratic party as their team rather than the people of Minnesota.
As I have PROVEN here before, Minnesota's medical cost increases are right in the middle of the pack of states.
Furthermore, our average costs for employee based health insurance is higher than the national average.
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/profileind.jsp?ca...
Furthermore, Minnesotans support the public option 51-37 in a recent poll.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/6155912...
I'll let you prove you (likely bullshit) assertion that the Twin cities has the highest concentration of medical device manufacturers in the US. The rest of your post is OBVIOUS crap.
"Twin Cities MSA Leads Nation in Concentration of Medical Device & Equipment Jobs (2008)
The Twin Cities MSA trumps the nation in employment concentration in the medical device and equipment industry, announced the Business Facilities’ 2008 Rankings Report. The top ranking reflects the economic strength of the region, given that biotechnology “is the fastest growing economic development sector in the U.S.” As a state, Minnesota ranks second nationally, with 7% of its jobs in medical devices and equipment." http://www.metromsp.org/sidebar/why_nationalranki...
The $30 billion tax aimed at medical devices — the bread and butter of our innovation — could kill this region. Seriously. I think Klobuchar and Pawlenty for working their butts off to try to lessen the blow. Paulsen has been doing a nice job, too. Franken has signed a couple letters, but has also made it clear he would vote for this bill as it is written today . Thanks, Al.
I'm not writing as a centrist or a moderate republican. I'm writing as a Minnesotan. This tax is very very bad for our state. These are good jobs we would lose.
I have heard nothing suggesting that Sen. Klobuchar will vote against the bill, or in any procedural votes. She may sound cautious, but on the floor I doubt she will do much to imperil the bill.
Can we all just take a second to reflect on the years and years of inaction that has brought us to this point? We are all debating a major legislative piece, but health care has been an issue that we've all avoided for far too long. One bill will not solve it all, but simply saying that we don't agree is not a legitimate reason to do nothing either.
She is making it clear that she has reservations, and from what I've read it is due to the fact that this bill would be largely funded through a mechanism (Medical Device Tax) that would disproportionately hurt Minnesota jobs. It would hurt Minnesota more than any other state in the union. Why Medical Devices? They don't have a strong lobby in Washington.
Klobuchar is doing the right thing. She works for you and me, not Harry Reid.
MNProgressive is reporting that she is "getting flack" for not speaking out on behalf of hte bill like Franken is.
Wow do the posts on this thread sort of remind you of the Republican Convention? Lieberman and everything is there including a little protest by lojasmo. Anonymous certainly has nothing to do with moderates of any ilk… who once said the only thing you find in the middle of the road is a yellow stripe and roadkill?
We're talking about 8% of our GDP here… that is a huge number and not something that should ever be legislated hastily or without diligence.
(8%: 16% of GDP is currently spent on healthcare, 1/2 of which is already paid by the government)
Yes, I know that Klobuchar and Franken both signed a letter expressing "concern" about the Medtronic impact, but concern is not going to translate into a vote against cloture, and unlikely against the bill itself.
But my larger point is this: the bill that will be produced will not be perfect for anybody. But nothing is simply unacceptable as an alternative. The inflation rate in health care is much higher then wages, and if nothing is done, we will not be able to afford anything else.
I wonder how much money in government grants the biomed companies get to do their research that does not have to be paid back? I wonder what percentage of their research investment is actually funded by our tax dollars. I also wonder what their profit margin is when selling those medical devices? I am not saying I automatically support a tax on devices, I just would like to have more information.
I do believe the bill should pass cloture and move on to the floor fight.
Now can anyone tell me what ever happened to the moderate Democrat that occasionally would vote for a Republican sponsored bill?
I cannot remember any such in recent memory in particular if the bill was a major Republican goal item.
David
And specter fully supports the public option (because it's the right thing to do) surprisingly.
He is a lying opportunist
No, he is a centrist who knows that getting universal healthcare in the form of a badly designed bill isn't worth it.
Alec - good post. Good point regarding the procedure vs. the ultimate vote.
Lojasmo - had Gore beat Bush in 2000 (perhaps he did
), Lieberman would likely have been our VP until a year ago. On the Democratic side. We're not talking about some fly-by-night operation here. This guy has been respected for years. You are just pissed that he isn't agreeing with you on the big issues of the day.
I don't think anyone is asking democrats to blindly fall in line at all on Health Care. There is a very real belief that you should not block you caucus from having an up or down vote. Lieberman, Nelson, Lincoln should and will vote their conscience, but cloture is a procedural step. If you block your own party on procedure you should have serious issues with your caucus.
You have to separate Senatorial procedure from the democratic process. The purpose of a caucus is to have unity on procedure. The purpose of the democratic process is to vote your conscience. If you want to be part of a caucus, you support them on procedure.
Also, Trader Joe went about as far as possible against his own party. The "punishment" he got from Obama was that the president made sure he kept his chairmanship. Sounds like a crushing blow for stepping out of line!
No, he is a lying opportunist.
The $2.5 million he got from the insurance industry probably didn't have anything to do with his decision. Certainly not, because Joe Lieberman is an ethical man. A very ethical man.
For the record, I have never respected Joe Lieberman. I was opposed to his being on Gore's ticket It was a stupid idea, and he has always been a backstabbing prick.
How about Joe Lieberman? He had to run as an Independent in order to win his last race? He is being villianized by the Democrats, who he caucuses with, because he is not carrying their water on health care reform.