DLC lines up against Dean's re-regulation remarks

[Rose Siding]

I'm surprised to see Clark's name isn't used in their examples.

Gov. Howard Dean delivered a good speech on "Enron Economics" in Houston Tuesday. It echoed Sen. John Edwards' lines about the Bush administration's determination to shift the tax burden from wealth to work, and earlier speeches by Sen. Joe Lieberman and others on the importance of corporate responsibility. It even appropriated a concept championed by the DLC, and endorsed by President Clinton, that we need a "new social contract for the 21st century, based on shared responsibility and our country's deepest values," to guide economic policy. The speech had us hoping that Gov. Dean might take to heart the challenge from Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards to offer America answers, not just anger.

Unfortunately, in an interview with a small group of reporters, Gov. Dean suggested that his answers might be a lot like his anger -- driven more by reflexive opposition to Bush than by a well thought-out effort to solve America's problems. According to Jim VandeHei of the Washington Post, Dean said the answer to the corporate excesses of recent years was "a comprehensive 're-regulation' of American business."

"The former Vermont Governor," reported VandeHei, "said he would reverse the trend toward deregulation pursued by recent presidents -- including, in some respects, Bill Clinton -- to help restore faith in scandal-plagued U.S. corporations and better protect U.S. workers." Dean also "listed likely targets for what he dubbed as his 're-regulation' campaign: utilities, large media companies, and any business that offers stock options. Dean did not rule out 're-regulating' the telecommunications industry, too."

http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=131&subid=192&contentid=252220

[Hawkeye-X]

1. DLC has no credibility

n/t

[GreenPartyVoter]

28. You said it!

They are so out of touch with what would actually help get this country back on the right track.

[slackdude]

2. I can only hope

That this next election spells the long overdue death of the republicrat DLC. Who's the genius who thought that embracing the failed policies of the republicans and the corrupt corporate agenda was a good idea?

[drfemoe]

9. Amen

If things are working out so well for them, and they are so satisfied with the way things are going, how can they support a change in resident? It sounds like they want things to remain on course as they are.

Take the environment, for example. Command-and-control regulations designed for big, industrial polluters don't cope very effectively with problems like global warming and polluted streams that stem from a myriad of small sources: cars, lawn mowers, dry cleaners, and farms. Authorities increasingly are using a combination of market incentives and information technology to do a better job of monitoring such pollution, measuring performance, and decentralizing decision making to address region-specific problems. The power of information -- of measuring performance and publishing results -- is also creating stronger incentives for America's public schools to improve after decades of failed micromanagement from state and federal bureaucracies.

[blm]

10. Dean did and led deregulation efforts as governor. He was also DLC

throughout his tenure as governor.

It was lefties like Kerry who maintained some balance for the Democrats against the further rightwing pull of the Libertarian leaning centrists like Dean.

[drfemoe]

16. Improvement

is what Dean stands for. So many terms are just meaningless.

You might call one "improvement" -right- or -left- but what does it mean and who cares what you call it if it gets the job done?

This seems to be the mind trap of many Kerry people, believing they can seriously debate using meaningless terms.

.... "lefties" maintain balance to the "rightwing" pull of a "centrist" (huh?)
.... "libertarian" has nothing to do with -right- or -left- .. the "balance" to libertarian is authoritarian ....

[w4rma]

23. You sound like a broken record, blm.

Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean. Dean.

[blm]

25. The misconceptions about Dean need correcting TOO often to be ignored.

If Dean people would be more honest and acknowledge that Dean has ALWAYS governed as a DLC Dem and his basic principles of governance are rooted in DLC dogma, then I wouldn't find it necessary to enlighten them.

[LuminousX]

29. No one says he isn't centrist

or that he followed DLC policies in the past, but has broken with those policies where he feels they are not helpful to he country as a whole.

The DLC has failed to adapt. Dean has.

[paulk]

35. he has adapted in his rhetoric, perhaps

He still has yet to govern that way. The real question one must ask when deciding whether or not to support Dean is - will what he SAYS now be different than what he's DONE before.

Will his words match his actions?

[CWebster]

54. Because in saying what he says

He is willing to go against the party leadership.

[blm]

36. How do you know? What are Dean's core principles?

We don't know, because on some bedrock Dem issues he has only recently switched positions that he held his ENTIRE career in government.

[LuminousX]

39. The only issue that I see that is a 'campaign conversion'

is the death penalty. I can live with that.

Everything else, I can clearly see his progression of thought.

[dsc]

40. That wasn't a campaign coversion

He has been in favor of that since the mid 90's. Some little girl was murdered and that swung him.

[LuminousX]

42. Really? I heard he only vocalized support after he started running

and only stated that that particular incident was what swayed him.

*shrug* Either way, it is no skin off my nose since it isn't a impending issue. I'd rather have someone who is reluctantly for it than someone who is gung-ho about it.

[Pavlovs DiOgie]

51. FYI, in case you were curious :)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A1907-2003Jul2¬Found=true

Dean once opposed the death penalty, citing "two reasons. One you might have the wrong guy, and, two, the state is like a parent" -- it ought to set an example. He also said, "I truly don't believe it's a deterrent." That's three reasons, but never mind. Then, on account of two horrific crimes, Dean's thinking underwent an evolution. "I came to realize because of the Polly Klaas case and because of similar other cases that sometimes the state inadvertently has a hand in killing innocent people because they let people out who ought never to have been let out."

Granted, that was the case with Klaas, the 12-year-old California girl who was abducted, sexually attacked and murdered back in 1993. Her killer, Richard Allen Davis, had a long criminal record and was out on parole when he committed the crime. But none of his previous crimes were for death penalty offenses. Dean could argue that Davis should never have been free and deserved to die because of what he did to Klaas, but not for anything he did before. Davis didn't slip the noose. There was no noose for what he had done.

The second case Dean cited apparently took place in Vermont. "We had a case where a guy who was a rapist, a serial sex offender, was convicted, then was let out on . . . a technicality, a new trial was ordered and the victim wouldn't . . . go through the second trial. And so the guy basically got time served, and he was the man who murdered a 15-year-old girl and raped her and then left her for dead. . . . So life without parole doesn't work, either."

[LuminousX]

56. Can we find a time before he was campaigning when he said this?

[blm]

44. heheh..."progression of thought"

some people progressed on those issues YEARS ago and stuck with them pulling AGAINST those who were pulling rightward.

Look at the thanks they get.

Look who gets the reward.

The prodigal son.

[w4rma]

34. Dean was a centrist. Dean still is a centrist.

I've said that Dean is a passionate centrist many many times.

[polpilot]

41. The DLC has been neutered by Dean and they won't recover. Their

blessed candidates ______________________________ and posssibly ______________________are gone and they are privately shunned by Dean. It's all over for the DLC.

Dean '04...

[a_lil_wall_fly]

33. or the Demicans

or all over variations of the idealogy that the Democratic leadership has taken the party over the last 20 years

[9119495]

3. Time for re-regulation

Since '92, my cable, power, and health bills have gone up ahead of inflation. Deregulation was supposed to create MORE CHOICE IN THE MARKETPLACE, but it has not resulted in much. Media companies carve up territory and monopolize municipalities. If a competitor comes in, they are bought out or given territory elsewhere.

Profits have soared and there has been no redistribution of wealth. What corporations used to pay in taxes is now excused so some city can win the jobs over another city. Industries have turned states and communities against each other.

We must not believe the Republican lie that government governs best when it does the least governing. We don't have to regulate everything, but if a monopoly exists in a market and prices rise above what the market would've demanded with competition, its time to take a stand.

[eissa]

4. Being a Californian

I oppose deregulation and wholeheartedly welcome Dean's position. The energy fiasco was a direct result of repuke governor's Wilson decision to deregulate energy and it cost the customers and the state billions, not to mention Gray Davis his job.

[AP]

8. As governor of VT, Dean enthusiastically supported a deregulation

plan for VT which was very similar to CA's.

When he started running for President, he thanked the legislature for not passing it.

Dean is very confusing.

[unfrigginreal]

15. Is a person running for office never supposed to change an opinion?

Dean has been traveling this country for going on 2 years now. Do you think it's possible that some enlightenment could have occurred during those travels? Hasn't he been direct about stating that the California experience with deregulation was an eyeopener for him?

I just don't get it, when some folks here think that once you have staked out a position, it is cast in stone never to be changed.

Now, if you think that either of his positions was taken simply because it was the popular thing to do politically, then I would agree with you. I haven't found that to be true of Dean, but there are some in this race that I believe have shown themselves to be political opportunists.

[eissa]

19. Clinton was for deregulation as well

Do the recent corporate scandals teach us nothing? Are we suppose to stick to a position no matter what? If you were opposed to civil rights in the 50s and then changed your mind in the 60s, should you be charged with "waffling"? I'll admit I didn't really get into the deregulation battles when they were occuring in my state; I don't recall the debate getting much coverage and I wrongfully did not do my homework. But boy was I in for a shock when the blackouts and the bills came!

[LuminousX]

18. Actually, he changed his position once he saw how awful it was

But you wouldn't want to say it that way because it doesn't make Dean look bad. I understand. You campaign your way, I'll campaign mine.


Landslide for Dean

[blm]

26. Dems were telling him why it was bad for years. He sided with CATO.

Dean only changes his mind when he observes a disaster? Kinda like Bush and 9-11, ignoring the warnings of Clinton and Gary Hart till it was too late for 3000 people.

[LuminousX]

32. So wait, why is the DLC opposed to reregulation?

Dean has consistently made up his own mind on things. Sometimes he follows the DLC, sometimes he follows CATO, sometimes he follows Kucinich. Nothing says you have to dogmatically follow one thing, have one inflexible opinion, or be unable to adapt to new information.

So, the Dems were telling Dean deregulation was bad. But the Dems are now saying reregulation is bad. Oh, what should we believe in these confusing times?

[blm]

37. I think it was his rhetorical failure

in bringing this up. Last night on CNN, Brownstein reported Dean softened the rhetoric afterwards with reporters.

So.... you're left trying to interpret the "straight talk from the straight shooter".....heh....yet again.

[drfemoe]

49. I know

How would you feel about a medical doctor who made a certain diagnosis .. things worsen .. but he is too proud to consider an alternative to his original diagnosis? You die.

Or would you rather have a doctor who is not too proud to admit another diagnosis might fit and work to bring about a cure, no matter how it makes him "look"?

If this approach is preferable in a life or death medical issue, why is it scorned in a life or death political situation?

You are not going to know in advance exactly what any president is going to do. That's why we have to "trust" whomever we support. Lots of you don't trust Dean. So be it. We don't trust "xyz". It really is a matter of faith. And attacking someone else's 'religion' is not productive. Information presented to someone with an open mind is productive. Meanwhile, 'you' have picked who you trust, and 'I' have picked who I trust. Whoever gets the most "trust" (votes), we hope, will win the nomination.

* LuminousX * I am not addressing you directly, just following your line of thought *

[KaraokeKarlton]

21. That's a crock

Dean initially thought deregulation might be a good idea and he wanted to give it a try...UNTIL he saw the outcome. As soon as he saw what happened in California he decided deregulation was a very bad idea. The change took place a long time ago, NOT just since he's been running for president. Nice attempt at spreading misinformation, though. I might advise you that it's really unwise to speak flasehoods about my state and what takes place here. I will not hesitate to call you on it everytime I see you posting bad facts.

[drfemoe]

22. Is it true

that during the East Coast blackout in August, VT had power?

It seems the whole 'de-regulation' scam was more about a transfer of regulation, much like 'tax cuts' which merely result in transfer of wealth.

[Rose Siding]

45. Yes, because Dean threated to sue the feds

to keep VT off the nat'l grid. VT remains regulated and didn't lose power during the blackout.

[eissa]

46. Wow, I hadn't heard this one

But I'm not surprised. It's his ability to stand up and fight that has really kept me in his camp.

[blm]

48. Baloney. The legislature wouldn't let Dean deregulate

and only AFTER the California problem did he admit he was wrong.

[Rose Siding]

52. Here's the link

snip>
Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean said the Bush administration, through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, tried to merge the New England's electrical grid with New York's when he still governor of Vermont.

"I raised hell and told them they better get a lot of lawyers," he said in a telephone interview. "The president always sees bigger as being better, and that's not true. What we really need to do is let local people take care of things. What we need is good, strong regional grids. We do not need huge megagrids.

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030816/frontpage/76885.shtml

[DemDogs]

30. BLM is right on this --

Dean as the DLCer and --was he just dense? that's what he argues on NAFTA -- the deregulator. He is has a more DLC history than any candidate in this race other than Lieberman. In fact, on many issues, Lieberman and Dean have been on the same side for decades. The "straight" talker turns out to be look opportunistic. Now I want him to be right on the issues, so I welcome changes but don't suggest that he is a straight talker or that he is the antidote to the DLC.

[blm]

38. Dean needed a DISASTER to see the light? He was warned for years

by other Democrats and he CHOSE to side with the deregulators.

[LuminousX]

43. Just like Kerry chose to side with Bush instead of Byrd re: Iraq.

They are all assholes.

[blm]

47. he didn't side with Bush, he negotiated with him

for a better bill that put Bush at the UN providing evidence (which forced him to over reach causing his credibilty to take a dive) and stopped Bush from extending force into Iran and Syria.

You can't see ANY worth in denting Bush's credibility and stopping further war in Iran And Syria?

Your benevolence is heartwarming.

[Scott Lee]

59. And voted to support IWR. Case closed.

Kerry is a Bush war apologist.

[Nazgul35]

5. It's a remarkable thing to live in fear....

that's what it is like to be a slave....

As Roy says (paraphrased) in Bladerunner....

The DLC and the elitists who have taken control of our party are sooo scared of everything, that they are slaves to whomever has this power over them...

First they feared the repugs...so they became more like them....

Now, instead of admitting their failed policies, they group together to fear Dean, because he threatens their power base...after all, what's more important....winning elections to inact policies that will help the American people....or continuing to destroy the party simply to make sure that at the end of the day they still have access to the money?

Fear is all they have....fear is all they offer....follow the DLC to another disaster in the coming election!!

PS: For those of you who are waiting to say I told you so should Dean win the nomination and lose the general (which I don't think will happen)....If your guy cant win the primary...he wasnt going to win the general election either....so get over it!!!

The DLC is preparing themselves to say we told you so...so they can foister their ownership of the party for another 10-20 years....

[wryter2000]

6. Come live in CA, pals

Watch your state hand over its treasury to Enron and see how you feel about re-regulation then. Why don't they just give up and join the Republican Party?

[slinkerwink]

7. the DLC should just die out....

down with the power-hungry elitists!

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

24. They're dying as we speak....

... the Doctor is calling for the priest to give last rites!

[CWebster]

57. They will not go down without a fight

and their money is on Clark.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

60. Yes, but the People's money is on Dean.

It's gonna be interesting to see who prevails.

[jobycom]

11. I'd like to specifics, not just competic rhetoric

Sounds like the DLC is more worried about the term "regulation" than about the actual practice They use the term in its extreme to imply government-run industry-- something that was never the reality. I doubt Dean means that. I'd like to see what each does mean beyond the concern for the impact of specific terms. The DLC is convinced Americans don't want to hear terms like regulation, whereas Dean knows his own backers do, and is hoping that using the term sounds bold enough to sway others. He might be right, the DLC might be right. But that's just terminology.

What are his actual proposals? Does he have specifics on what reregulation means to him? To me, it sounds good, but I can see it going too far, stiffling growth, sending more jobs overseas than NAFTA ever dreamed of doing, and resulting in Dems being booted even further out of the political picture. I doubt Dean means that.

How much is rhetoric, how much is policy. Anyone have any good links?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

27. Regulation can be as simple as placing a watchdog in place to

itemize the effects of policy(Step 1). Step 2 is price-capping and profit regulation of the industry in question. Step 3 is Government control. I suspect that Dean supports Step 1 in some instances and Step 2 in others. (Step 3 for Health Care)

Imo, all industries should be at least Step 1. All utilities should be Step 2. Health Care, Social Security and Education should be Step 3.

[jobycom]

53. Yeah, but that's my point

Clinton was for many forms of regulation, and I suspect the DLC is, too. But they are quibbling over the word, which implies a greater degree of regulation than they want. Dean, on the other hand, has not shown any great desire to quash all corporate independence.

I suspect the two sides are pretty close, and are mainly arguing over which rhetoric will win the most votes. Dean would be less corporate than the DLC, but at this point, you could reregulate with reckless abandon for four years and still come a long way from getting too extreme even for moderates.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

61. I understand.

It's clearly a struggle for power within the party. Even if it's only the power to control message, as you suggest. It's interesting to follow.

[GainesT1958]

12. I think Al From & Co. aren't quite sure...

Just what to make of Gen Clark...or of John Edwards, for that matter. Neither have exactly gone overboard to cowtow to the DLC mainstays, nor to their "manifesto". From's guy in this is Lieberman, and that may just leave From out in the cold pretty early in the actual primary schedule, unless he "shifts" to another candidate pretty quickly. The DLC finds itself in the rut of saying "we're not like Dean" almost as much as they protest that "we're not like Bush". Well, they're getting caught in the very trap they warn the Party should not fall into next year by those actions--the trap of articulating what "we're AGAINST", but omitting to state just what "we're FOR".

People like Gen. Clark, Dr. Dean and John Edwards are stating what they're for, and doing so very articulately. It's the DLC who neither understands nor appreciates them, not the overall potential pool of voters--either in the primaries or the general election. From's the guy who needs to "get with the program", and soon.

B-)

[HereSince1628]

13. To all those previous anti-DLC posters...you are hardly alone

Salute!

[el_gato]

14. the dlc can rot in hell!

new democrat = old republican

[whirlygigspin]

17. "only little people pay taxes" -L.Helmsley

regulations?!!!!!!!
I suppose next Mr.Dean will expect corporations to pay taxes too!!! Why I have a good mind to move my company offshore.

the commie bastard! $(%*$*#)

[LuminousX]

20. Should Democrats support private citizens or big corporations?

And they wonder why they get called Bush-lite.

[GreenPartyVoter]

58. If that's how you feel

(and incidentally I do too) then why do you have Dennis K marked with a red light on your graph? He's definitely no fan of corporate government.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

31. Of Course the DLC is Pro Enron Type Business!

:puke: DLC


The DLC is Satan!!!

[Mass_Liberal]

50. Good!

Exactly what america needs.

[CWebster]

55. It is Unbelievable that Dean is being attacked for making this stand

and than he is being attacked for the opposite. Well,not really.

Where the hell do your own candidates stand? Kerry, who protested Dean's position on working standards in other countries because it would be bad for the US economy---and you call Kerry a liberal? Our companies are racing to set up in countries without labor standard to increase the bottom line at the expense of US workers - so who the hell is Kerry concerned about? And don't even get me started on Clark---and the evidence is right here, reflected in DLC's talking points, that Clark in echoing the same, is the DLC's effort to stem Dean's populus tide in an effort to keep their own grubby fists on the controls.