House Democratic Party Inside Baseball

Becerra, Grayson, Ellison-- actual leaders, not money-grubbers

I'm never really comfortable with a corrupt out-of-touch Beltway committee parachuting into an American congressional district and telling the Democrats there who their candidate for Congress should be. In the old days, even the worst DCCC chairmen-- think Rahm Emanuel-- used to tip-toe, at least publicy, around interfering in primaries. Not so the cloddish, reptilian Steve Israel. He's interfering in more Democratic primaries-- and pretty much always on behalf of the more conservative and more corrupt candidates-- than any other DCCC chairman in history. Yes, Steve Israel is worse than Rahm Emanuel! Emanuel, at least, knew how to win races. Israel is a congenital loser.

I wasn't thrilled to see the DCCC come thundering into the FL-13 special election on behalf of Alex Sink with the intention of burying Jessica Ehrlich. FL-13 is a blue district that the DCCC has mishandled for years. Obama beat McCain there in 2008 and Romney there-- even with a Republican-friendly gerrymander!-- in 2012. But the willfully incompetent Florida Democratic Party and an even lamer DCCC never effectively went after the GOP incumbent, Bill Young. A two-cycle strategy, anathema to all DCCC chairmen, could have easily taken him out. This year, before he announced he would retire-- and before he died-- a MoveOn poll by PPP showed a generic Democrat would have beaten him 48-43% and that after voters were made aware that Young backed the harmful Republican government shutdown, he would have lost 51-42%. Only 33% of respondents said they approved of the job Young was doing.

Last year, Jessica Ehrlich ran against Young and lost, 189,552 (58%) to 139,671 (42%). She raised about half the money Young did. The DCCC refused to back her candidacy and didn't spend a nickel on her campaign. This year, it looked like the DCCC might back her-- at least until former gubernatorial candidate alex Sink jumped into the race. There was never any question who would win that primary but the DCCC couldn't resist now that they've declared they intend to interfere with primaries whenever they want to. They immediately set about to drive Ehrlich out of the race. (Another fair-weather friend, EMILY's List, withdrew it's endorsement of Ehrlich and endorsed Sink.) Yesterday the DCCC strategy succeeded and Ehrlich, bitter and frustrated, gave up and went home.

A poll released Wednesday morning confirmed what everyone already suspected: FL-13 voters are ready to elect Sink and they she would have won a primary against Ehrlich and will win a general election against any of the third tier candidates the GOP is putting up. None of the GOP candidates got above 31% against Sink. And in a Democratic primary, Sink was crushing Ehrlich 69.6-10.6%. Sink and Ehrlich are both moderate Democrats. Neither appeared more or less progressive than the other and both fit nicely into DCCC centrism. So why would the DCCC come in so heavily?

In CA-31 I've been watching what Steve Israel is doing to push his empty suit loser of a candidate, Pete Aguilar against progressive attorney, Eloise Gomez Reyes. This is the bluest district in America (D+5) with a Republican incumbent-- in this case, extreme right-wing multimillionaire Gary Miller-- and the only reason Miller won the open seat last year was because the DCCC screwed up the election by getting behind Aguilar, who came in third, behind two Republicans! Refusing to even speak with Eloise, Israel immediately endorsed Aguilar again and has been pressuring California congressmembers to back him. I've spoken to half a dozen of them who are not pleased that Israel lied to them about Aguilar and about Eloise. But that's how he rolls-- and Democrats in Congress don't do anything about it. Progressives, especially, are so policy-oriented that they avoid power struggles-- which inevitably involve fundraising-- even though those power struggles are what keep them from accomplishing their policy goals.

With just a few exceptions, I've almost given up on current Members to do anything about the caucus leadership. Open positions always seem to go to the most corrupt Members, the Steve Israels, the Joe Crowleys, the Rahm Emanuels, Steny Hoyers and Debbie Wasserman Schultzes. I asked some of the Blue America candidates who they would like to see replace Pelosi is she steps aside, as she has indicated she plans to. Conventional wisdom is that the job would fall to someone unsavory, a virtual Hobson's choice between Hoyer and Wasserman Schultz. But I asked them to not even think of those kinds of realities and instead just imagine an ideal world, not a corrupted one. Most of the candidates said they're not familiar enough with the DC players to make a rational choice. But several did have something to say that made some sense. Tom Guild, for example, said that he's "not familiar with some of the current members of the U.S. House" and added that "since I’m an Okie, I don’t spend much time in the nation’s capital. I’m open to consider any number of possibilities as the next Speaker of the House. The one person who I met when he spoke to the Oklahoma Delegation to the 2012 Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, and visited with when he came to Oklahoma City to speak at our state party headquarters, is Keith Ellison. Congressman Ellison is intelligent, well spoken, and principled. Those would be the three things I would consider in voting for leaders in the U.S. House. Keith would be a good chief spokesman for House Democrats. I’m open to others who are also intelligent, well spoken, and principled who would also be good spokespersons for House Democrats." Good instincts there.

Nick Ruiz has a lot of skepticism about current leadership and he wasn't eager to comment. Coming from an academic background he approached the question theoretically at first: "Leadership requires serious risk-taking and a sort of fearless preoccupation with social inclusivity and solidarity, and an almost uncanny sense of attention and effort paid to the sphere of possibility-- all while often sacrificing your own political hide. Leadership has an ability to tolerate isolation and social discomfort. Leadership is lonely. Leadership makes mistakes. But its resolve is never questioned. I don't see any leaders in the House today." But in the end he posited that if Pelosi really does step aside, "I think we should have a serious conversation about Alan Grayson becoming leader of the Democratic caucus. No present member is better equipped or more effective at channeling the kind of change of pace and energy needed to push the Democrats into their own light. Nobody's perfect. But we're better than the present caucus suggests; much better. Stay tuned for the 2014 election, because we're about to prove just who Democrats are again, and what we can do to represent the best interests of America's working families and individuals. Alan Grayson is an integral part of that future equation."

Let me finish up by going back to Eloise Reyes, the progressive candidate in Southern California who Steve Israel is trying to stiff. "Under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, we have begun a new and vibrant tradition of electing a Speaker of the House who defies the odds and brings a wealth of bold, progressive values to the Democratic Caucus. Years and even decades down the road, our model of House leadership will continue to be shaped for the better by Nancy Pelosi’s legacy as a trailblazer and true public servant. We have seen these same qualities of integrity and determination in other members of the California delegation, and it is my hope that amongst our future Speakers of the House will be Latino pioneers, like Representative Xavier Becerra, who reflect the changing face and values of our country."

If you'd like to help Eloise, Tom and Nick win seats in the next Congress, you can do that on this ActBlue page.