Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 08:43 PM
Original message |
Nationalizing the Congressional elections. |
|
Remember the "Contract with America"? The GOP won the House majority by nationalizing the congressional race. Their Victory dance really had not not so much with a lackluster two first years of the Clint administration as it did with making the case against an entrenched , do-nothing House. It worked!!
Why not do it again?
Its my view that The Dean-Dubya battle sort of stands by itself and is largely about policy (Terrorism and the Economy) and personality.
What if The Dems nationalize the congressional races along the following lines:
1) We will restore fiscal Sanity to the federal budget. 2) We will do something about Education in this country to compete on a global stage and end the "offshoring of High tech" jobs" 3)We will Protect the future by making a College education within the financial risk of all Americans. 4) We will alter the way we pay for Health insurance and put money back in the hands of all families. 5) We will insure that the Greed of a few at the top of the corporate ladder never goes unpunished. 6) We will move effectively to protect Social Security and protect pensions. 7) ??? 8) ??? 9) ??? 10) ???
The Other thing that made the Contract effective is that it had a face at the lead-- "Gingrich". People knew that Gingrich was the leader of the GOP.
Due Respect to Ms. Pelosi....SHe is no Newt Gingrich. No. In order to move people to action the Dems in the House need a unifier and a recognizable face. Some one who would empathize with Americans on Kitchen Table issues.Someone who would have instant national credibi;ity and could move into the Speakership and then move Congress to act.
I submit that there is no Democrat in the house who can do that. I propose that to nationalize the Congressional election, the Dems need someone who is not a member.
You Constitution and history buffs will recall that one need not be a member of the House in order to become Speaker.
There are only two Dems that I can think of who could nationalize the congressional election and who could become "Speaker of the People's House. Al Gore and Bill Clinton.
Can you imagine Bill Clinton taking on Mr. Hastert (who?) in a 90 minute town hall debate?
|
Lone Pawn
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 08:44 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Clinton would be wonderful in the House |
|
In a John Quincy Adams sort of way.
|
ayeshahaqqiqa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 08:51 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Regaining Congress is vital |
|
and something we should be working for as much as for the White House.
|
rfranklin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 08:59 PM
Response to Original message |
3. That's the kind of creative thinking that we desperately need! |
|
But is there enough time to do it, even if the Dem do-nothings could get off their butts? Part of the Republican success was the lockstep loyalty enforced by Gingrich and DeLay.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
9. Pelosi certainly could not get it done |
|
I do not disagree, but that's why an external catalyst needs to emerge and why I don't think we can get to specific in the details.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
14. The Contact with America link |
NavajoRug
(330 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 09:03 PM
Response to Original message |
4. I like the issues you've listed here, but there's a big problem with them |
|
They aren't focused enough.
The 1994 GOP "Contract With America" was not just a laundry list of things that everyone would like to have -- it was a list of specific, concrete pieces of legislation that would be acted upon in a GOP Congress.
We have no chance of following that example unless we include very specific proposals -- like how we intend to keep companies from moving jobs offshore, how we intend to make sure that "greed" does not go unpunished, etc.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
8. Ta mean like term limits? haha |
|
One of the characterstics of the first contract was that it was something that most americans could get behind. My sense is that this only works if you do the same thing here.
ANd wuite honestly ghte Dems have such a big tent that it would be hard to put alot of specificity in without it looking increasingly partisan.
The war cry here is that we have a lboated special interest manipulated Congress and we need radical reform agenda. The argument would seem to be about Congress fiddling while the country burns. The appeal is to populist sentiment the specific.
How you craft more specifiity is tricky
|
LiberalFighter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-04 09:17 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Before Gore or Clinton could become Speaker |
|
The Democrats would need to gain control of the House.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
The point was that Clinton or Gore could lead a pre-election Campaign on Kitchen table value, They would spearhead the campaign and thus effectively "run" for speaker Obviously kn one would cast a vote for them but it would be made clear that to Bring on these reforms the voters would have to select a Democratic candidate for the Congress.
|
Silverhair
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 09:36 AM
Response to Original message |
PsN2Wind
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 10:56 AM
Response to Original message |
10. Hard to see how Clinton |
|
could be too effective in debating against the "off-shoring" of jobs after pushing for NAFTA, GATT, et al. Under his watch we saw the explosion in our manufacturing going away as companies moved to Mexico, China, Viet Nam or anywhere the labor was cheap (the giant sucking sound). After looking back at your list, I see you only refer to the off-shoring of "High tech" jobs, so never mind. Let the blue-collar workers fend for themselves.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. I was going for populist sentiment |
|
To me the issue is about the quality of education in the country and not off-shoring per se.
"old labor" jobs are a sticky wicket with no easy solution. Auto and steel industry have problems that are long term and there is no easy solution. I certainly am not suggesting we ignore those issues only that we not make it part of a reform agenda.
|
mrgorth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 11:55 AM
Response to Original message |
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-04 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. THe neat thing about this is>> |
|
That the presumptive nominee can easily distance himself from the congressional campaign initiative championed by Clinton should he choose to do so.
I personally think it make sense to do some distancing by simply saying that "well this has never been tried before, but if the Republicans can play games with the normal process in California, Colorado and Texas, I see no reason why we can't challenge their ineffective House Leadership in this manner. Its for the people to decide who shall lead Congress. (Bill Clinton) has his campaign to run and I have mine.
|
Perky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-07-04 08:34 PM
Response to Original message |
15. Who's the House Dem Election Committee chair? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri May 03rd 2024, 01:26 PM
Response to Original message |