CUFF The Blue Dogs, CUFF The New Dems-- The Democratic Party Doesn't Need A Republican Wing

Blue Dogs and New Dems are, by nature, addicted to corruption

A Democratic operative texted me yesterday that he could smell another conservative shill the DCCC was preparing to unleash, Joshua Welle. "It's like he just rolled down the conveyor belt at DCCC shitty candidate factory they have in the basement at 430 South Capitol St." Let me guess, I replied, another centrist veteran? "Bingo!" Welle is the 3rd Democrat who wants to take on moderate Republican Chris Smith-- moderate on everything but Choice, which he opposes... with hysteria. NJ-04 may have been relatively swingy but the R+7 PVI of 2016 is now an R+8. Obama's 45% losses in 2008 and 2012 turned into a rout against Hillary, who lost to Trump with just 41%. The district is a mess for Democrats. Low consciousness Democrats gave Hillary big wins against Bernie in each of the 3 counties, Monmouth, Mercer and Ocean and then the two with most of the votes, Momouth and Ocean went strongly for Trump. Democrats would probably have better shots taking out Leonard Lance, Rodney Frelinghuysen. Tom MacArthur and maybe Frank LoBiondo than in defeating Smith. But Welle (and the DCCC) seem to think Democrats are too stupid to notice Welle's right-of-center orientation and that he can pick up disenchanted Republicans because he's a vet and a businessman. How lame a strategy is that? It's the core of how the DCCC has lost-- and keeps losing-- Congress.

Over the last couple of weeks the Blue Dogs and the New Dems, the two organizations that make up the Republican wing of the Democratic Party inside Congress, have announced their first batch of conservative candidates they're helping run in primaries (with help from the DCCC). Some of the candidates on the list have called me to either give me a heads up or to make excuses. Some claimed not to know anything about the organization that had just endorsed them, although they applied for the endorsement and-- at least in the case of the New Dems-- they have to sit down for an interview. And neither group takes just anyone. If they don't sense a "tolerance" for corruption and an innate conservatism, they don't endorse.

What I've tried to explain over and over is that the Republican wing of the Democratic Party is why there was no public option in ObamaCare. It had ZERO to do with the Republicans; it was 100% New Dems and Blue Dogs. When Ryan or McCarthy boasts that some crap bill-- like yesterday's CUFF Act-- passed with a bipartisan majority, they mean all the Republicans and a handful from the New Dems and the Blue Dogs. In fact, why don't we talk about the Control Unlawful Fugitive Felons Act (CUFF). It's Kristi Noam's bill-- co-sponsored bt right-wing crackpot Pete Sessions (R-TX) and yesterday it passed the House 244-171. All the Republicans-- other than 3 libertarian-oriented members-- voted for it and all the Democrats opposed it-- except for 21 of the usual suspects from the Republican wing of the party. Here were yesterday's aisle crossers:

• Ami Bera (New Dem-CA)
• Brendan Boyle (PA)
• Cheri Bustos (Blue Dog-IL)
• Lou Correa (Blue Dog-CA)
• Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX)
• Josh Gottheimer (Blue Dog-NJ)
• Bill Keating (New Dem-MA)
• Ron Kind (New Dem-WI)
• Dan Lipinski (Blue Dog-IL)
• Dave Loebsack (IA)
• Stephen Lynch (MA)
• Stephanie Murphy (Blue Dog-FL)
• Tom O'Halleran (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Jimmy Panetta (CA)
• Colin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN)
• Jacky Rosen (NV)
• Raul Ruiz (CA)
• Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog-OR)
• Kyrsten Sinema (Blue Dog-AZ)
• Tom Suozzi (NY)
• Eric Swalwell (CA)

New Hampshire Congresswoman Carol Shea Porter, who explains every vote she takes to her constituents, said she couldn't "vote for this bill because it would take Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits away from tens of thousands of elderly people and people with mental health issues or disabilities because they have outdated or dormant warrants that, in the majority of cases, law enforcement does not pursue. Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal says: ‘Despite the title of the bill, the seniors and people with severe disabilities who would be harmed by this bill are not felons, as the Chairman acknowledged at our markup."

Her office provided some background to a bill 168 Democrats voted against and 21 from the Republican wing of the party backed:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) is currently restricted from distributing any Social Security payments to those otherwise eligible if they are considered “fleeing felons.” Court cases helped settle the definition of what constituted a “crime of flight” in 2009 and 2010. Since that time, SSA has withheld benefits from those “fleeing to avoid prosecution, or custody or confinement after conviction” for a felony or violating a condition of probation or parole.

The CUFF Act would return to an older, outdated definition for “fleeing felons” that would effectively cut off tens of thousands of Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipients with outdated or dormant warrants that law enforcement generally does not pursue.  This change applies to SSI only, not to Social Security’s retirement or disability programs. SSI is a means tested federal income supplement primarily designed to help very low income older, blind, and disabled Americans meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter.  As such, this change would directly impact the most vulnerable.

This is a fact that even the bill’s proponents have acknowledged. According to Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Richard Neal: “Despite the title of the bill, the seniors and people with severe disabilities who would be harmed by this bill are not felons, as the Chairman acknowledged at our markup. They are people who have been accused of a felony, or accused of a parole of probation violation. They have not been tried or convicted of the offense underlying the warrant. In many instances, they are not even accused of committing a felony, as probation can result from a misdemeanor offense alone.”

This is an example-- there's usually more than one every week-- of why Democrats should not vote for Blue Dogs and New Dems, at least not in primaries, no matter how much they curse Trump.