The Dems Now Have Some Dogs in the Fight
Blue Dogs and New Dems are flexing their muscles
Democrats won a stunning victory in November, but that may have been the easy part. Now, they have to prove to voters they can stand together to get things done. But, as Republicans learned on issues like immigration, party unity can be a fleeting notion.
Veteran liberals such as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Charles Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, hold the party's reins, but their power is likely to be tested by a group far removed from the party establishment-conservative Democrats who are flexing newfound muscle. Eighteen of 41 incoming House freshmen joined the New Democrat Coalition and/or the Blue Dog Coalition, caucuses of pro-business and fiscally conservative Democrats, respectively. Both were born in the wake of the 1994 Republican revolution. Moderate New Democrats claimed the mantle of pragmatists like Bill Clinton. Pro-technology and free trade, the New Democrats boast a few more members, but the budget-minded Blue Dogs may have more bite. Now 44 members strong, this conservative caucus looks to be a cohesive voting bloc on fiscal issues. It also claims some freshman stars, like former NFL quarterback Heath Shuler of North Carolina and former sheriff Brad Ellsworth of Indiana, both of whom won in GOP strongholds. Fourth-term Arkansas Rep. Mike Ross, cochair of the Blue Dogs, says party leaders recognize them as a "force to be reckoned with," adding, "We didn't defeat Republicans with liberal Democrats. We're in the middle ... and that's where we're trying to bring our party."
Both Pelosi and President Bush met with caucus members before Congress reconvened. Pelosi has doled out key assignments as well, putting seven Blue Dogs on the House Appropriations Committee, which controls congressional purse strings. Conservative Democrats are the driving force behind three key initiatives in Pelosi's touted 100-hour plan: implementing pay-as-you-go rules requiring Congress to offset new spending, adding transparency to the earmarking process, and promising members adequate time to review a bill before a vote.
Muscle. That's a far cry from the years when Blue Dogs operated on the fringe with hard-line members mostly from the South and Midwest. But as the federal deficit grew, so did their numbers, with members from California to New York. They still represent mostly rural regions, and while a few take liberal stands on abortion and gay marriage, most are pro-gun, pro-defense, and antiabortion. Many feel that has kept Blue Dogs from leadership positions. By contrast, New Democrat Rep. Rahm Emanuel led the party's bid to win back the House. But, in a sign of the times, he did so by recruiting Democrats more conservative than himself.
That strategy could set the stage for some testy battles with old-guard liberals now chairing key committees-not only Rangel but Rep. Henry Waxman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and Rep. John Dingell of Energy and Commerce. Observers expect the biggest fights to be over pay-as-you-go rules, which are anathema to more free-spending liberals. Showdowns are possible over some key Democratic initiatives, such as halving interest rates on student loans and reforming the alternative minimum tax so it doesn't hit more middle-class families-a fix that could cost the government $50 billion to $70 billion a year. Under pay-as-you-go rules, Democrats would have to find a way to offset that cost. Michael Franc of the Heritage Foundation expects Democrats to be tempted to waive the rules in tricky cases-thus inflaming the party's conservative wing-or raise taxes, which could be politically dangerous. "If Blue Dogs say, 'We're not going to give you a bye on this'... they've created a $50 billion headache for Charlie Rangel," Franc says.
Headaches aside, Ross says the Blue Dogs will stand firm. "There's going to be a natural conflict," says James Thurber, a political scientist at American University, "between Blue Dogs and the old bulls that are chairs."
Even in the more moderate Senate, a new middle may be emerging. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine is overhauling the long-standing Senate Centrist Coalition to create a less formal atmosphere for Republicans and Democrats to talk over a weekly lunch or breakfast. Even the word centrist is likely to go in order to avoid any ideological association. New independent Joe Lieberman and Republican Lamar Alexander, meanwhile, are creating their own weekly, bipartisan breakfast group. Cynics note that bipartisanship and moderation always sound good at the beginning of a new Congress. And Pelosi's plan to kick-start the Democratic majority is mostly "low-hanging fruit," Thurber says. "The hard stuff comes with tax reform, Iraq, immigration, and healthcare." That's when we'll see just how well these Democrats can get along.
This story appears in the January 15, 2007 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.