Folks, we have a three party system, and Specter's proof
Tuesday was a good day. Specter defects to the Democratic
Party. On the same day Senator Coryn (R,
TX) proclaims that in Nov. 2010 the "Republicans will regain their status as
a national party," which means even they know now that they really aren't all
hands on deck. But even though it was a good day for Democrats, something gives me pause.
Last month, Senator Bayh formed the Moderate Dems Working Group, a coalition linked through the Third Way to the House's Blue Dogs. He posited the formation of this group in December after the Democrats had taken everything in November. Members of both coalitions are "Honorary Chairs" in the Third Way, a group that "is the leading think tank of the moderate wing of the progressive movement." When commenting on posts, such as Tuesday's Specter defection (or "addition", depending upon your taste), I called Specter an instant "Blue Dog"--which I am assuming that he will be. And though the reasons of his defection are many, including the fact that he has little chance of being re-elected next year as a Republican, one big one is the security that the Moderate Dem Working Group (from now on, I'm just going to call a spade a spade: Blue Dogs) will offer him.
The Blue Dogs, now that they are essentially active in the House and Senate, are now often the group that "mainstream" Democrats are having to negotiate with (especially since the Republicans keep voting "no" and refusing to play ball with anyone). They are a boon to the Democrats, as they caucus and vote with them, mostly. But it's obvious to me that they now are growing in power--especially with the self destruction of the Republicans. The House's Blue Dogs boycotted dues to the DCCC in 2007, now negotiate with the Democrats as a semi-independent body, and frankly have more influence over policy than the Republicans. With their official formation in the Senate as well, I'm starting to see them as a de-facto party of their own.
I guess my point is that we should acknowledge that the Democrats are a coalition, one party of many. But within this coalition is an ever growing, ever independent group. While the Republicans are pounding sand with an ever dwindling moderate/economic/business wing and a steady staunch Christian wing, the Blue Dogs are stealing their thunder.
Another thought is that we at
TPM often joke about the splitting of the Republican Party and its demise. Somehow I've always pictured it as an actual
split, the business/ moderates and the Far Right. But the split is actually a migration of many
to the Blue Dogs, leaving the ever-marginalized behind. Many posters on TPM voice their wish that Democratic
moderates would leave the Party. As the
Blue Dogs gain more independence and continue to assert it, maybe someday they
are going to get their wish. But the real splitting would happen here within the Democrats.
So yeah, let's toast to the addition of another Democrat to the Senate! But also let's think a bit on what Specter's addition actually means.
I finally figured out how to link with Coryn above, but had already done this, so here's some reference links:
Brian Beutler's take on the
formation of the Moderate Dem Working Group: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/03/disunity-09.php
The Third Way's take on the
formation of the Moderate Dem Working Group: <http://www.thirdway.org/press/release/71>
Bayh's
announcement in March: http://bayh.senate.gov/news/press/release/?id=b30d7f79-9eb1-4819-980f-9489825825ba
Bayh's announcement in December
that he wanted to form a new coalition: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/14/evan-bayh-forming-conserv_n_150874.html
The
Blue Dogs: http://www.house.gov/melancon/BlueDogs/Member%20Page.html
