Most Actual Democrats Are Progressives-- Though Not The Ones In Congress

According to a new poll from the University of Chicago's General Social Survey, 54% of Democrats describe themselves as liberals. In 1974, when GSS first asked that question, only 32% did, most of the rest describing themselves as moderates or conservatives. Harvard's Co-operative Congressional Election Study released this year, show that even Dems who identify as conservative, support progressive policies. In fact, more than 90% of Democratic voters-- if not careerist congressmembers, support Medicare-for-All, want to see the federal minimum wage increase to at least $12 per hour, and agree that the EPA should regulate carbon dioxide emissions. While Republican-controled legislatures around the country are passing very extreme and radical anti-Choice legislation, 80% of Democrats agree that governments should not restrict women’s access to abortion.

But even the grassroots of the party identifies as liberal and supports a progressive agenda, many, perhaps most, Democrats in the House are not liberal and do not support a progressive agenda. They are careerists and opportunists who support whatever it takes to advance their careers. Like most politicians, they follow; they do not lead. There are nearly two dozen men and women running for the Democratic presidential nomination. When it comes to policy, two-- Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren-- are leaders. The rest are, at best, followers or, at worst, reactionaries.

There are 235 Democrats serving in the House today. Only 108 are co-sponsors of Pramila Jayapal's new-and-improved Medicare-For-All bill (H.R. 1384). Only 91 are co-sponsors of Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's Green New Deal (H.R. 109). And, most shockingly of all, there is even resistance inside the Democratic caucus-- primarily led by the New Dems-- to Bobby Scott's $15 federal minimum wage legislation (H.R. 582). 205 Democrats have signed on as co-sponsors, although some are plotting behind the scenes to scupper it. And that still leaves 30 Democrats unwilling to co-sponsor a desperately needed livable minimum wage, primarily Blue Dogs, New Dems and cowards who are afraid of the wrong thing. (Cheri Bustos' new diktat about no primaries, helps make conservative DINO Democrats, like herself, feel less anxious about screwing their own base.

It's imperative that unaccountable Democrats in deep blue districts who never have to worry about facing a Republican opponent fear having to face a Democratic one. I've noticed that after Marie Newman almost defeated bigoted Blue Dog Dan Lipinski in 2018, he began voting slightly less frequently with the GOP. (Example, his Trump adhesion score for the 115th Congress was a ghastly 40.9%, one of the worst scores for a Democrat in Congress in terms of backing Trump. Newman is primarying him again and in the 116th Congress, his score is perfect-- zero... no Trump votes at all. ProgressivePunch still rates him an "F" but his lifetime crucial vote score is a 57.99, while this year his crucial vote score is 92.31, the same as progressives Chuy Garcia, Maxine Waters, Jerry Nadler, David Cicilline and Steve Cohen.)

The CPC-- Congressional Progressive Caucus-- has done well on the policy front but has been largely ineffective as a political vehicle. The new co-chair, Pramila Jayapal, is working hard to remedy that. Last week, the CPC actually stood up against party leadership when it tried to rush through a budget that drastically overspent on the military and woefully underspent on domestic progressive priorities. Pelosi and Hoyer were forced to withdraw their plans to call a vote on the budget, caught between the Democratic wing of the party (basically the CPC) and the Republican wing of the party (Blue Dogs and New Dems). Jayapal: "This is a big victory in that it became clear that without real, strong progressive inclusion into the process of a bill, we're not going to be able to get there. We have to make sure our priorities are taken into account."

The budget bill Pelosi and Hoyer tried to ram through caps Pentagon spending at $664 billion in 2020 and $680 billion in 2021, while capping domestic spending at $631 billion in 2020 and $646 billion in 2021. The CPC position is that there has to be equity between domestic spending and defense spending. A much better strategy would be to flat out stop increasing the Pentagon budget until after an audit is successfully completed.

Results of the inspection-- conducted by some 1,200 auditors and examining financial accounting on a wide range of spending including on weapons systems, military personnel and property-- were expected to be completed later in the day.

“We failed the audit, but we never expected to pass it,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan told reporters, adding that the findings showed the need for greater discipline in financial matters within the Pentagon.

“It was an audit on a $2.7 trillion dollar organization, so the fact that we did the audit is substantial,” Shanahan added... Shanahan said areas the Pentagon must improve upon based on the audit results include compliance with cybersecurity policies and improving inventory accuracy. In a briefing with reporters, he did not provide a figure detailing how much money was unaccounted for in the audit.