« Election Reform Activist Paul Stokes on 'We The People' Thursday | Main | Quote of the Day: Election, Campaign Finance & Media Reform »

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Dems Offer A New Direction for America

Pelosireid_1
Pelosi, Reid. Photo credit: AP/Dennis Cook

As you've probably noticed, I offer a fair amount of criticism about Democrats. Most Democratic bloggers do. I think it's a positive thing. Holding our leaders and representatives accountable and chronicling their actions (or inaction), good and bad, can only serve to strengthen us in the long run. This time, I want to stress some of the very positive developments that would occur if Dems regain power in at least one House of Congress.

Last week, Congressional Dems introduced a new frame for their efforts to counteract Bush's incompetent fantasyland approach to governing. They want to take America in A New Direction, presumably one where decisions are made based on facts and choices are made based on realities, fairness and reason.

I think we can all agree that the Repubs have been steering us in the Wrong Direction for years now, if not decades. We need fresh eyes on the problems. We  need fresh solutions. We need a return to serving the people instead of the ideology, to working for the common good of all Americans, not just the privileged few.

There are promises being made about what the Dems would do if they win back the House of Representatives and/or the Senate. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and others pledged they would immediately introduce legislation to raise the minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour when we regain the majority. In the first week Dems would also introduce legislation to:

  • cut student loan interest rates in half
  • drive down the costs of prescription drugs by authorizing the Secretary of Health and Humans Services to negotiate with Big Pharma on price
  • adopt all the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission to boost national security and funding for it
  • eliminate about $18 billion in tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies and using the savings to develop alternative fuels

The complete list of proposed actions is summarized here. According to an article in USA Today, Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Reid had this to say about the Dem plan:

"The American people need to know, if you win, what are your priorities," she said. Reid said the party is standing "with the people we have always stood with: seniors, students and the hardworking families of America. We intend to tackle the issues that matter most."

If they win back power, Dems plan to introduce domestic policy legislation in three main areas: a reform package to reestablish an honest Congress, a civility package to make it a bipartisan Congress and an accountability package that ensures no new deficit spending, sticks to pay-as-you go and requires an honest audit of the books.

In a statement, Pelosi also addressed the need for A New Direction on Iraq:

Nowhere is the need for a New Direction for America more obvious than in Iraq. Certainly, the most important is the loss of life; we passed 2,500 lives lost, and nearly 20,000 have been injured, half of them permanently. We also face the loss of our reputation in the world and the loss of our strength in terms of our military capability to protect our security. But, what about the money?

As to the cost of reconstruction -- $9 billion is unaccounted for. The American people deserve to know how their tax dollars are spent and if it’s in furtherance of the goals as stated by the Bush Administration.

... Democrats want to take us in a different direction. Energy, minimum wage, health care, higher education, fiscal soundness – this is the New Direction in which we want to take our country. It meets the needs of the American people; it respects their concerns, their aspirations, their hopes, their dreams, and their challenges. But we must do it in a fiscally sound way.

Just imagine how much more powerful all this would be if more Democrats would join Pelosi in supporting Rep. John Murtha's exit plan for Iraq. Pelosi has reportedly been pushing hard to convince more Dems to join with Murtha but, as we know, some Dems would rather get struck by lightening than come out of the shadows and take a strong stand on the war.

June 21, 2006 at 10:18 AM in Democratic Party | Permalink

Comments

Trouble is that they (Pelosi, Reid, etc) make these statements then don't follow up with anything, making it more empty rhetoric while they hide in the corner seemingly afraid to stand up, speak out, and push back!!!

Posted by: VP | Jun 21, 2006 1:51:03 PM

I don't know about that. Pelosi and Reid have been speaking up rather strongly lately. The trouble is they can't get some of the other Dems to join them. They have both been very outspoken during the fake Iraq war "debates" that have gone on in the House and Senate. How do you whip dozens of shirkers into shape? They are convinced that if the say or do anything Rove and the beasts on the right will call them names. The ironic thing is that no matter what Dems say or do, Rove and the beasts on the right call them names. You'd think they'd realize that by now and show some authenticity.

Posted by: Old Dem | Jun 21, 2006 3:12:31 PM

Sounds like a good beginning, and I'm willing to give them credit for beginning the race, but not for finishing it. Not yet. I'd like to see them address the environmental crisis in this package. And though they may not say it, I hope one of the secret benefits of putting them in charge is a renewal of our membership in the ICC. I'd also like to see them demand that the Pentagon must be audited like every other department of the government, especially since they spend a disproportionate amount of our tax dollars.

The question that will haunt the Dems until it is answered is whether or not they have a leader or two among them who can bedevil their candidates and office holders to sign on to this moderate agenda en masse. I respect Murtha and Feingold for their solitary courage, but what we need is someone who can step into the leadership vacuum and fill it to overflowing, molding the office holders of our party into leaders again. This is a time of unprecedented crisis (yes I've seen Inconvenient Truth, and I believe it), and we need leaders who will acknowledge it and act like it.

This is the first good start I've seen in some time. Gives me hope. Thanks, Barb.

Posted by: John | Jun 21, 2006 5:28:10 PM

A new day, a new about-face by the Dems. Seems the Dems in the Senate didn't get the memo from the House that the party was set to go in a new direction. On a vote of 86 to 13, the Senate defeated Kerry's amendment that called for troops to be redeployed out of Iraq by July of 2007.

Looks like there was a new speech, but the same old direction - or lack of direction, which is more the Dems' style.

Posted by: John | Jun 22, 2006 11:22:10 AM

Oops. Forgot to mention: Harry Reid and our own Senator Bingaman are among those who voted against bringing our troops home. Nice photo op for Reid, above, however. Wonder where his mind was wandering, since today he seems to have forgotten all about that new direction.

Posted by: John | Jun 22, 2006 11:25:32 AM

Well you are correct in that there is an ongoing battle within the Democratic Party. No surprise there. Pelosi in particular has been trying to whip House Dems into taking a strong stand on Iraq but as we see, it's not easy.

It will be interesting to see how people vote on the Levin bill which I believe requires troop withdrawals to begin in 2006 but is looser about setting a hard date for all to be out.

As always, the Dem Party is not in lock step. It is our job, however, to keep the pressure on so more join (or are elected) in our camp.

I don't think you can talk about The Democrats as being one thing. There are more and more good ones emerging and we must concentrate more on supporting them while keeping tabs on the others.

Posted by: Kossian | Jun 22, 2006 11:48:16 AM

They've already voted on the Levin-Reed amendment and it lost too, but with almost every Dem in support, 60 against, 39 for, 1 not voting.

Levin-Reed Amendment vote

Bingaman and Reid did support that one.

The Levin-Reed amendment would:

Begin the "phased redeployment" or pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq in 2006.

Require the administration to submit a plan by the end of 2006 for continued phased redeployment beyond 2006.

Transform the role of troops left in the country to a "limited mission" of training and logistical support for Iraqi security forces, protection of U.S. personnel and facilities, and targeted counterterrorism operations.

Posted by: barb | Jun 22, 2006 11:59:19 AM

How many Americans are a minimal contingent in Baghdad?
The provisional goverment is operating out of a basement in an American fort.

We haven't even secured the road between the green zone and the airport. It still costs 30K-40K to travel the road. You can only imagine how much it cost for Bush to go there.

If we get out we had better do it quickly and all at once. We better have a plan and close safe areas of re-deployment. Kuwait would be good.

Kurdish country is more dangerous as they are surrounded by enemies. The Turks will not help us because they hate the Kurds. The Kurds are relatively pro-western. Personally, I pity the Kurds.
Where in Iraq would the oil be located? Do the Shia dominate the oil resource? Do the Kurds have any oil?

I don't think the Sunni have any oil in their territory as it stands.

Posted by: qofdisks | Jun 22, 2006 7:25:40 PM

Post a comment