Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

A Somewhat Polemical Attempt to Define the Conservative Democrat

By

Many conservative Democrats, particularly those now involved in health insurance reform, are caught up in this middle ground fallacy. Allegedly for reform, tempermentally against it, wanting change, but not wanting change, they contradict themselves.

As Jacob Hacker points out in a WaPo op-ed, the Blue Dogs complain about the inflation of medical costs but their plan would actually increase it. They supposedly want to help the constituents but consistently reject a public plan that would help those constituents. In trying to find a happy medium where none really exists, such as the insurance lobbies stalking horse called health insurance co-op's, conservative Democrats are threatening to derail reform altogether.

Sen. Max Baucus, probably the man most responsible for screwing the health reform pooch, is a study in the contradictions of the conservative Democrat. As Think Progress notes, Baucus recently told a newspaper that he was continuing to pursue a bipartisan solution to health insurance reform while admitting the GOP's only goal was to kill reform.

At this point, only a fool thinks a compromise is possible on reform. We're down to either/or in the health insurance reform debate. By and large, Democrats want reform. Uniformly, Republicans do not. Even the allegedly moderate Sen. Chuck Grassley has been trafficking in death panel rumors.

I recognize the fact that my description of the conservative Democrat is not exhaustive. It may not even be very accurate, but it is important that progressives come to terms them what makes them run. As the GOP heads toward rump status, non-knuckledragging conservatives will need somewhere to go, and the destination is likely to be the Democratic Party.

 

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. the Blue Dogs complain about the inflation of medical costs but their plan would actually increase it.

    <

    p>Maybe they know it WON’T reduce it and are fighting the urge to drop it but are being whipped by Pelosi, Obama and the DNC to support it.

    <

    p>That’s just ONE THING I find wrong with your theory.

    <

    p>BTW… when you come back to earth, can you point to the section of the reform bill which reduces medical costs…

    • BTW… when you come back to earth, can you point to the section of the reform bill which reduces medical costs…

      <

      p>…I’d point you to the public option. If you look how expensive and inefficient private care is compared to Medicare, as well as how inefficient and costly our health care system is compared to other nations, I’d hope you’d agree. After all, I know you’re concerned about the debt and waste, fraud, and abuse.

      • Some questions. (I’m taking a liberal position as given here.)

        <

        p>

        1. Rural states often have effectively a single health insurer. One might expect that insurer to have undue political influence in that state. Are the Democrats unreliable on health care mostly from such states and mostly unduly subject to such corporate influence?
        2. The Republican PR machine can quickly turn a vote — symbolic or substantive — into a negative campaign ad. Are Blue Dogs no more than Democrats who campaign very defensively, who want to try to duck such ads at all costs?
        3. Given the sharp partisan divide in the U.S., there’s only slight advantage for a Democrat to gain by playing nice with GOP positions. After all, the GOP core doesn’t even like Republican moderates. Is this analysis wrong or is there some kind of delusion infecting Blue Dogs? If the latter, why are they so deluded?
        4. Speaking of ideology, just how much unity is there among Blue Dogs? Are they taking the old moderate Republican positions on the full spectrum of issues (national security, economics and budget, social welfare, and social issues)? Or are they more unified on some issues, less so on others?

          1. Blue Dogs’ leadership comes from South Dakota, Louisiana, North Carolina, and Indiana. The members seem to be evenly split between rural states and states with rural parts like NY, PA, and CA. I haven’t looked at whether the actual Dogs come from rural areas.

          <

          p>2 & 4. I don’t think the Blue Dogs are merely defensive Democrats. They seem to have the temperament I described.

          <

          p>

          The Blue Dog Coalition – who celebrated 15 years of leadership in 2009 – has built a reputation as  a serious player in the policy arena, promoting positions which bridge the gap between ideological  extremes. Many of the group’s policy proposals have been praised as fair, responsible, and  positive additions to a Congressional environment too often marked as partisan and antagonistic.

          Their positions seem very much like those of old-fashioned, pre-Goldwater Republicans. But there’s less an ideology than an attitude. If they have a goal, it seems to be “let’s not get carried away.”

          <

          p>3. Why the “delusion”? It works in their respective districts. It allows them to claim the conservative mantle and the Democratic Party. But I suspect it’s more temperament than coherent ideology or policy.

  2. but the supposed “blue dogs” are being manipulated by something far more powerful than a sense of moderation. They are being swayed by the ever powerful health insurance, drug, and health care industry.

    <

    p>To me, the proposed insurance exchange with a “public option”, as well as strong regulations for existing private insurers was the compromise between single payer and doing nothing.

    <

    p>The idea that these conservative Dems are not satisfied with the cost of reform when it includes a public option, (even though a public option should at some point become self funded, because it will be run like any insurance company, except it won’t need a profit margin), makes them appear to be short sighted and focused on something more important to them than moderation.

    <

    p>You can call these reps “blue dogs”, but they don’t have the same make up as a true Democrat.  If they did, they would be able to accept the concept of a public option, they would understand the need for it, and they would not be bending over backward to try and keep the current profit motivated system in place.  

    • Blue Dogs are under the power of financial interests and conservative ideology.

      <

      p>Part of my interest is how they explain their positions to themselves.

Archives