Fear of a Democratic planet

October 18, 2006 in Democrats, Republicans

One of the latest tactics of the right used to scare people into voting Republican in November is to use the specter of a Nancy-Pelosi-led House, if Democrats win back a majority of seats. What they fail to mention is exactly why that’s a bad thing. And if you look closer into Pelosi statements and the likely composition of a Democratic House, well, there’s less to fear and much to like.

Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post, for example, takes a look at what the legislative priorities of the Democratic House would like be:

In the House, the Democrats have made clear that there’s a first tier of legislation they mean to bring to a vote almost immediately after the new Congress convenes. It includes raising the minimum wage, repealing the Medicare legislation that forbids the government from negotiating with drug companies for lower prices, replenishing student loan programs, funding stem cell research and implementing those recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission that have thus far languished.

Sounds pretty d*mn good, doesn’t it? Exactly! Popular legislation that the country wants, and that conservative ideology — radical conservative ideology — has kept out of political discussion. Of course, there’s political motivation to bring these issues up:

All these measures command massive popular support. The reason they’ve not been enacted is that House Republicans have passed rules making it impossible for the Democrats to offer amendments to any significant legislation, thereby sparing themselves the indignity of having to choose, say, between the interests of their financial backers in the drug industry and their constituents.

*chortle* Love this strategy! Force the Republicans to decide between popular measures and their corporate and ultra-conservative financial backers. If Republican House members stand up against minimum wage, stem cell research, student loans, and lower drug prices, then they’ll look like — accurately, I might add — the party of religious extremists and big business. If they go along, they’ll look like…well…Democrats.

More and better:

Cognizant that they will owe their victory in part to the public’s revulsion at the way Congress does (or avoids) business, the Democrats also plan to revise House rules to enable the opposition party to introduce amendments and to sit on conference committees, from which Republicans have routinely excluded them since Tom DeLay became majority leader. They also will ban members from accepting gifts and paid trips from lobbyists.

If the Democrats manage to win the Senate, argues Meyerson, then that would put the Republican party in the unenviable position of filibustering to oppose these bills. If the Senate folds under popular pressure, then that would force the lame-duck President to use his veto.

What a better way to frame the difference between the political parties before the 2008 election?

And what better way to reassure the nation’s voters — and Montanans, as well — that only are Republicans not the party looking our for their interests (unless they happen to be a CEO or right-wing ideologue), but that Democrats are.

Tired of opposition to stem-cell research? Tired of Congressional representatives giving themselves pay raises while shooting down the minimum wage? Tired of corruption? Back a Democrat this election. They’ve got their legislative priorities right.