Chris Van Hollen Offers Change You Can't Believe In

Even Van Hollen gets it right sometimes-- Ashwin Madia (right)

DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) has a pretty progressive voting record that mirrors his pretty progressive Montgomery County congressional district. In the 2007-08 session he was the 77th most progressive member of the House (with a 96.73 score)-- no Donna Edwards (100 score), but way better than caucus members from the Republican wing of the Democratic Party like Nick Lampson (68.69), John Barrow (71.96), Chris Carney (79.65) or dozens and dozens of other so-called Democrats who have been as culpable as Republicans in supporting Bush's devastating policies and enabling the corporate agenda they get so well paid to support. But, like I said, Van Hollen's better than these guys.

In fact, Van Hollen abandoned his direct superiors, Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Rahm Emanuel when they backed Bush on the wretched FISA bill that does such great damage to the basic tenets of the Constitution. Like most Democrats, Van Hollen voted no. He also voted no-- against Hoyer and Emanuel (two major war supporters)-- a few weeks ago when it came to continued no-strings-attached funding for the tragic and disastrous occupation of Iraq. Yeah, so Van Hollen's not a complete dickhead.

But he sure sounded like one on the radio this evening. Andrea Seabrook interviewed him for NPR and he's either more clueless than seems likely or he lied his ass off. His main point was to persuade listeners that for Barack Obama to be able to accomplish all the change he's promising, voters need to support the DCCC's candidates. Before we get into this year's batch of beauties, let's take a look at some of the candidates for change from 2006 who are now in Congress. Actually, before we even go that far back, let's take a little look at the candidates who were elected since the big DCCC push in 2006, the special election victors. There were four. One, a Van Hollen neighbor in Maryland, Donna Edwards, was not supported by the DCCC and, in fact, was very much opposed by them. There is not a single member of Congress who better personifies change than Donna Edwards. She defeated an old time corrupt hack who was serving the corporate interests that paid him off-- he has since disappeared into the bowels of K Street where he works passing out bribes as a lobbyist instead of getting them-- and already has the only perfect voting record in Congress. Look:



Instead the DCCC spent millions of dollars electing reactionary Democrats in Illinois, Louisiana and Mississippi, respectively Bill Foster, Don Cazayoux and Travis Childers. Each voted to continue the war in Iraq a few weeks ago; there's change you can believe in! The most reactionary of the 3 has been Childers. Looking only at the ProgressivePunch "Chips Are Down" scores, he claims a dismal 42.86. That's an awful lot of voting across the aisle with the Republicans on a pretty broad range of issues-- the 10th most of any so-called "Democrat" in Congress. And Cazayoux is the 14th worth-- with an equally horrendous 48.0 score. They make Bill Foster-- the 32nd most reactionary Democrat in Congress almost look like he might actually turn into a Democrat after intensive remedial work over the course of a decade or two.

Now in 2006, among the victors who, according to Van Hollen, are part of the change team, are freshmen Nick Lampson (TX- 28.91), Joe Donnelly (IN- 33.49), Brad Ellsworth (IN- 36.74), Jason Altmire (PA- 39.07), Heath Shuler (NC- 41.12), Chris Carney (PA- 42.52), Harry Mitchell (AZ- 47.20), Zach Space (OH- 47.89), Baron Hill (IN- 49.30), Tim Mahoney (FL- 50.70) and Gabrielle Giffords (AZ- 50.70). How does one interpret those scores. Well, they only represent tough substantive issues where there was a clear partisan divide. These freshmen voted with the Republicans more than with the Democrats. The only change they represented was one that gave Bush more Democratic support for his heinous agenda than he's ever had before.

But you can't really blame all this human detritus on Van Hollen. After all-- with the exception of Childers, Cazayoux and Foster-- these members were all part of the Rahm Emanuel/Steny Hoyer plan to keep the war in Iraq going. So let's look at the garbage Van Hollen is seeking to burden us with in 2008. When the DCCC asks you for a donation, some of that money will go to virulent anti-choice fanatics like Bobby Bright (AL), Paul Carmouche (LA), Don Cravins (LA), Kathy Dahlkemper (PA), to name the most notorious of the bunch.

Of course there are some excellent candidates-- some who have also been endorsed by Blue America-- but when the DCCC makes a choice between a grassroots progressive and a corporate shill, they almost always go for the corporate shill. Right now Van Hollen is working diligently to derail progressives like Steve Harrison in New York and Howard Shanker in Arizona. Yesterday their well-funded hack candidates Ethan Berkowitz (AK) and Suzanne Kosmas (FL) beat out genuine progressives. A few weeks ago Maryland conservative Frank Kratovil publicly admitted that if he's elected he will join the Blue Dogs, who are not just reactionaries but are also the most corrupt bunch of Democrats in Congress, swilling at the corporate troughs and voting against working families so they can support their special interest paymasters. These people are the polar opposite of change and they will work hard to prevent Obama from getting his program through Congress. And Van Hollen knows it.