« RSVP for NM Wild Otero Mesa Outing | Main | Katrina: What Bush Begat »

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

Eric Griego: Democrats Search for Their Soul: Lessons from Lieberman

We're pleased to feature a guest post by Eric Griego, former Albuquerque city councilman and progressive candidate for mayor:

Que lastima .  What a shame.  Three-term United States Senator and one-time Vice Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman made history again this month.  In 2000, he became the first Jewish-American at the top of the American political ticket.  Last week, he became one the few senators in modern U.S. politics to lose his seat in a primary.  In Connecticut, like much of Democratic America, the natives were restless. 

Lieberman's opponent, antiwar millionaire Ned Lamont, ran as an outsider and tapped into growing discontent not just with the war in Iraq but the myriad other failed Bush policies.  Lieberman, his opponent asserted effectively, was as cozy with W as corporate lobbyists with keys to the White House.

The upstart Lamont, once snubbed by the Democratic establishment for taking on an incumbent in a primary, is now cuddling with the who’s who of the Democratic Party, including Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and our own governor. This, after former President Bill Clinton and a list other “centrist” Democrats campaigned tirelessly for Lieberman.

Progressives in the Democratic Party see the Lamont win as a major victory not just for their wing of the party, but for the “heart and soul” of Democratic voters. They believe Lamont is much more in line with rank-and-file Democratic voters. The center of the Democratic Party, it seems, just shifted.

The struggle within the national Democratic Party is echoed here at home. Democratic State Party Chairman John Wertheim was challenged at this year’s state Democratic convention by a group of agitated progressive delegates. Wertheim easily survived the challenge, but the discontent within the base of the Democratic Party has not gone away.

The Democratic Party has historically championed working men and women, fought for the environment and supported a foreign policy that engages rather than alienates the international community. From the New Deal to the Civil Rights Act to the Clean Air Act, Democrats have been the party of the people. However, recently Democrats from Congress to City Council have sided with corporate America, become environmental relativists and supported the preemptive wars of the Bush Administration.

Many Democrats are fatigued with the morphing of the two parties into one mega-centrist party whose members fight to keep their political office rather than make needed political change. They want their party back.

With several up-and-coming Democrats being wooed to the center, it is getting more difficult to see any real difference between the parties, especially on state and local issues. Several DINOs (that’s Democrats In Name Only) have held seats in the state legislatures and Congress for years. Some, like Lieberman, even hold leadership positions.

New Mexico House Majority Leader Kenny Martinez, a strong bet for both speaker and governor in the future, clarified it for me at a recent awards dinner. “It’s not so much moving to the center; it is speaking in terms of values that resonate with voters.”

The lesson of Lieberman’s loss should not be lost for the many up-and-coming aspiring politicos looking to lead the state in the future. Among the group—thirty- and forty-something up-and-comers at all levels of government in our fair state—conversations often center around how the next generation will take the reins of New Mexico. Will it be through go-along-to-get-along politics? Will it be by having a noncontroversial voting record to build broad financial and political base? Will it be by fighting for real reform even if it means taking on some of the powerful members of the Democratic Party? Or will it be by tapping into the alienation and discontent felt by the kind of voters who supported Lamont?

Democratic leaders from the growing list of presidential contenders to candidates for City Council have to do a gut check. What is it that we stand for as Democrats? Are we still the party of the working class? If so, why couldn’t we get an increase in the minimum wage in our Democratically controlled State Legislature? Are we still the party of conservation? Then why is it that developers run most New Mexican cities? Are we the party of diplomacy and internationalism? If so, why did so many Democrats line up like lemmings behind the failed Bush war policies?

One big sign that the waters may be changing is the national movement to hold Wal-Mart accountable for its dismal labor practices. A parade of presidential hopefuls, including our own governor, have or will join the national tour to put pressure on Wal-Mart to change its policies of not providing adequate health care and paying its workers substandard wages.

As the political “center” keeps drifting right, Democrats here at home and in Washington will have to decide if they will keep chasing that elusive “middle” or stand up for the core values of the Democratic Party. As they make that decision, they should remember Joe Lieberman. More importantly, they should remember Ned Lamont.

This commentary is cross-posted at the Alibi.

If you'd like to submit a guest post for consideration, contact me by clicking on the Email Me link on the upper left-hand corner of our main page.

August 29, 2006 at 09:53 AM in Candidates & Races, Democratic Party, Guest Blogger | Permalink

Comments

Hurrah for this post. We want authentic Democrats with a loyalty to ordinary people, not cowards who care only about getting big donations from corporate donors so they can get reelected and keep on selling out the working people and damaging the common good.

Some believe Lamont won only because of the war issue but it really was about his being an outsider with fresh ideas, big enthusiasm and a willingness to confront reality. In contrast, Lieberman is a pompous incumbent shielded from reality for many years in his DC bubble.

I find myself tempted to support term limits because so many incumbents are serving only themselves and the lobbying class.

Posted by: A Reader | Aug 29, 2006 12:03:58 PM

Term limits is the quickest way to make lobbyists more powerfull. The lack of institutional knowledge that newly elected members have results in those members relying on the lobbyists even more. Just take a look at Ohio. Not a good picture.

Posted by: | Aug 29, 2006 1:03:20 PM

That depends on who the newly elected member is. I can't think of anyone that listens to and obeys lobbyists more than long-time incumbents.

Any way you look at it we need new blood with passion and new ideas that hasn't been compromised by the bribes, I mean campaign donations.

Posted by: A Reader | Aug 29, 2006 1:50:19 PM

As Ned Lamont says in his recent op-ed in a CT newspaper:

"It begins with changing Washington. The people of Connecticut are tired of a Congress that has 63 lobbyists for every elected representative – spending more than $400,000 per month per member of Congress."

The rest:

https://www.nedlamont.com/page/invite/whatvoterswant

Posted by: Old Dem | Aug 29, 2006 2:34:32 PM

Term limits is the quickest way to make lobbyists more powerfull That is why we need to make accepting ANYTHING from a lobbyist illegal. I like the idea of term limits, anything that can help stop "cronyism" and "nepotism" appeals to me.

Posted by: VP | Aug 29, 2006 2:39:55 PM

What makes me mad is politicians acting like everything is fine, just keep conducting business as usual. But in the real world it feels like an emergency. It is a crisis for the democracy, our rights, the planet's ecosystem. We can't afford business as usual.

Too many Democrats mouth the platitudes about health care, the environment, energy but what do they really propose and fight for? They fight for reelection mostly. No cajones at all.

Posted by: Burque Bob | Aug 29, 2006 4:48:40 PM

"Too many Democrats mouth the platitudes about health care, the environment, energy but what do they really propose and fight for? They fight for reelection mostly. No cajones at all."

Well said, and Senator Bingaman jumps immediately to mind.

Posted by: rocketman | Aug 30, 2006 1:44:10 AM

We sure want those 16 seats but a clean sweep would put America on the right track

Posted by: suz | Aug 30, 2006 9:50:29 AM