The People Party vs. The Money Party: Here Are the Players
By David Sirota
Created Dec 4 2006 - 8:47am
The fact that our nation's politics is divided not between Democrats and
Republicans but between the People Party and the Money Party is obvious to
anyone who looks at the political system honestly (which is to say, not most
journalists or Washington political hacks). Calls for "bipartisanship" and
faux "centrism" that has nothing to do with the actual center of American
public opinion are most often moves to prevent the political debate from
analyzing the People vs. Money divide [1] that actually fuels our politics.
We already have plenty of "bipartisanship" - Republicans and a faction of
Democrats who regularly join hands to screw over the vast majority of
Americans.
Many people ask me, who? Who are the leading members of both sides of the
actual divide? The answer is that there is no official list because no one
is forced to formally declare their allegiance to the People Party or the
Money Party. But it is fairly obvious which lawmakers in the new majority
have specifically defined themselves on economic justice issues. Though this
is by no means a comprehensive list, here are the ones to watch in the
coming Congress:
PEOPLE PARTY LEADERS
Freshman Senators Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Jon Tester
(D-MT) and Jim Webb (D-VA): This is the core group of economic populists who
defined the larger populist trend in the 2006 election. Brown has a long
record in the House as an economic justice champion, as has Sanders (who I
worked for years ago). Tester (pictured above from an event he did here in
Helena last night) made his campaign about cleaning up K Street corruption,
and Webb has declared that his top issue is going to be addressing the taboo
issue of economic inequality.
Sens. Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Dick
Durbin (D-IL): Dorgan has been one of the strongest voices against
profiteering by the energy [2] and pharmaceutical companies, and has
recently written a book called "Take This Job and Ship It," [3] which is one
of the strongest declarations against lobbyist-written trade deals from any
sitting Senator in recent memory. Similarly, Feingold has voted against
every major lobbyist-written trade deal [4] that has come through the
Senate, even airing campaign ads on the issue well before that kind of
message became more popular. Kennedy, as the incoming chair of the Senate
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee is expected to
continue his rabid support for the People Party on nearly every economic
issue. And Durbin, now the number two Democrat in the Senate, has also had a
solid record on trade, and is additionally talking about pushing public
financing of elections - the most effective way to cut off K Street's
ability to manipulate Congress.
House Chairpeople George Miller (D-CA), David Obey (D-WI), John Conyers
(D-MI), Louise Slaughter (D-NY) and Henry Waxman (D-CA): Miller will now
head the Education and Workforce Committee where he is expected to turn his
longtime leadership on pension security, wage protection and union
organizing rights into legislative action. Obey, who will head the
Appropriations Committee (and who I worked for a few years back), will make
sure that any budget submitted by the White House that slashes health care,
education and labor law enforcement will be dead on arrival, and replaced
with a real spending plan that protects people (Obey was the guy who
famously authored amendments to slash tax cuts for millionaires in order to
better fund these priorities). Conyers will head the Judiciary Committee,
which oversees all sorts of regulatory affairs where his pro-consumer record
will finally have a chance to shine. Slaughter will chair the powerful Rules
Committee - the panel that governs how the entire chamber operates. She has
been an outspoken leader against media consolidation - one of the toughest
issues to champion because the broadcasting industry is so powerful. And
finally Waxman will head the Government Reform Committee, where we will now
have a chairman who is serious about rooting out the waste, fraud and
corruption that has plagued the no-bid Iraq contracts given to President
Bush's cronies. UPDATE: A reader suggested Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) on this
list - I totally agree. Peter has been one of the leaders on economic issues
for years.
Reps. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Tim Ryan (D-OH), Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) Nancy
Boyda (D-KS), and Bruce Braley (D-IA): Ohio's trio of Kaptur, Ryan and
Kucinich have been among the staunchest critics of lobbyist-written trade
pacts and advocates for the middle-class agenda in the House. Freshmen Boyda
and Braley both ran their campaigns almost exclusively on the trade issue.
In Braley's case, the Wall Street Journal noted [5] that he made opposition
to the Bush administration's free-trade agenda a centerpiece of his
campaign" urging "more focus on labor rights in national trade policy and
talked of using economic sanctions to keep America competitive."
MONEY PARTY LEADERS
Sen. Chuck Schumer and Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Steny Hoyer (D-MD): All
three of these men, now in leadership positions, have made very little
effort to conceal that they answer to Big Money interests. Schumer, for
instance, recently trumpeted a new report calling for post-Enron corporate
reforms to be gutted [6]. Emanuel was the architect of NAFTA who used the
prospect of his being in the majority on the Ways and Means Committee to
suck corporate cash out of Wall Street [7]. Hoyer bragged on his website
about starting his own K Street Project [8], and, as I documented in Hostile
Takeover [9], one of his top legislative staffers serves simultaneously as
an official for his corporate fundraising operation - 'nuff said.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA): Tauscher has been one of the most aggressive
spokespeople for the Money Party, using her position to undercut major
Democratic efforts to address core economic issues from a middle-class
perspective. As an example, it was Tauscher who ran to newspapers
desperately trying to let K Street know [10] that she would be working to
undermine Democrats' efforts to reform our trade policy. More recently, she
told the New York Times that Democrats would be engaging in a "kabuki dance"
[11] with their own base voters - implying that there would be moves for
show, but that pay-to-play business as usual in Washington will continue in
the new Congress.
Sen. Joe Lieberman (CfL-CT): Lieberman's reelection campaign (which I worked
against) was funded by a massive infusion of K Street and Republican cash
[12], and he will - as usual - be using his position to shill for the
special interests who have so openly relied on him. If ever there was a
lobbyist in Senator's clothing, Lieberman is it.
Any Lawmaker Who Signed This Letter [13]: Any lawmaker who signed this
famous letter [14] begging then-Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) to immediately
pass the credit card industry-written bankruptcy bill is most likely a
committed member of the Money Party. There may, of course, be some
exceptions as some lawmakers on the list may have realized the error of
their ways. But anyone who still believes in this letter and the bankruptcy
bill it advocated for is very deeply committed to the Money Party because
the bill was arguably the most brazen tool of middle class economic
persecution that ever came through the Republican Congress. Yes, some bills
were perhaps more far reaching, but most of those were at least packaged as
an effort to help regular people, even if they weren't. By contrast, the
bankruptcy bill made absolutely no real effort to pretend it was anything
other than a weapon to hurt regular citizens. And therefore, anyone Democrat
who signed a letter to a Republican Speaker of the House asking that he pass
this bill was making a statement not just on this bill, but on their entire
philosophy and loyalty on every economic issue.
KEY SWING VOTES
Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) - Leans People Party: Throughout his career, Kerry
has defined himself on issues other than kitchen table economic issues, such
as international terrorism [15]. But last year he made a very bold move in
sponsoring legislation [16] to give workers the same rights as corporations
in international trade deals. That said, this year he voted for the Oman
Free Trade Agreement [17], over the strong objections of labor, human rights
and environmental groups. Kerry's overall record - especially recently -
suggests he strongly leans toward the People Party, and my guess is he will
go toward this direction if he runs for President.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) - Unclear Which Way He Leans: The New York Times [18]
recently reported that as Dodd "prepares to take over the leadership of the
Senate Banking Committee while also considering a run for the presidency,
lobbyists and lawmakers are all asking the same question." As the
legislative director of the Consumer Federation of America put it: "Does he
become a populist champion on issues that broadly affect the middle class or
does he shrink from controversial issues that offend huge donors?" The Times
goes on to note that "Dodd has shown through a 25-year record in the Senate
that he is adept at going both ways." For instance, as I wrote about in
Hostile Takeover [19], Dodd in the 1990s used his position to override
President Clinton's veto of a bill making it harder for shareholders to root
out corrupt management. Then again, just this week, Dodd countered the Money
Party and Schumer in particular [20] when he told reporters that he did not
think Democrats should be so quick to embrace efforts to gut post-Enron
corporate accountability laws. Keep a close eye on Dodd.
Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) - Leans Money Party: Bayh has never met a
lobbyist-written trade deal he didn't like - except when he started thinking
about running for President. As one of the leaders of the Democratic
Leadership Council - one of the most well-known corporate front groups - he
has regularly regurgitated K Street talking points on everything from trade
to bankruptcy laws. Then again, his recent admission that he was wrong to
support the Iraq War signals that on a whole host of issues, he may change
his tune. While this may be only because he is running in a Democratic
presidential primary, it could be a real reversal. Nonetheless, though he is
a swing vote, he leans toward the Money Party.
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) - Unclear Which Way He Leans: Baucus is famous for
supporting the Bush tax cuts [21], the Bush Medicare bill and nearly every
major lobbyist-written trade deal that has come through the Senate. He also
recently made comments saying there is nothing anyone can do to stop the
outsourcing of American jobs [22]. Finally, as the incoming chairman of the
powerful Senate Finance Committee, he has recently made troubling statements
[23] that he may not support Democratic legislation to let Medicare
negotiate lower prices with drug companies, halt energy price gouging, and
eliminate the President's ability to "fast track" trade deals so that
Congress has no input in them whatsoever. All of these Money Party ties
aside, I am an optimist about Baucus because he has refused to budge on
Social Security privatization and because his state has changed. The two
leading politicians in Montana are among the two biggest leaders of the
People Party: Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D) and Sen.-elect Tester. Additionally,
Baucus is running for reelection, potentially against Republican Rep. Dennis
Rehberg who CongressDaily noted "might tack to the left of Baucus on trade."
So I'm leaving Baucus in the "unclear which way he leans" category.
Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) - Leans People Party: Rangel has been a fairly
reliable vote for the People Party during his time in Congress. That likely
stems from him representing one of the poorest districts in New York City.
However, since the election [24], he has said that as the chairman of the
House Ways and Means Committee, he is opposed to repealing Bush tax cuts for
millionaires, he is open to considering cuts to Social Security benefits,
and is interested in potentially continuing our current trade policy.
Ultimately, Rangel will probably stay true to his People Party roots - but
he is someone to monitor, especially considering the power of the committee
he will head.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) - Leans People Party: Frank has been a courageous
leader in proposing legislation to expose and rein in excessive CEO pay. But
like Rangel, he has made troubling statements since the election.
Specifically, the New York Times reported that as the chair of the Financial
Services Committee, Frank has proposed to business lobbyists a so-called
"grand bargain" [25] whereby "if business groups support the Democrats'
efforts to increase the minimum wage, extend student loans and expand
affordable housing programs, then the Democrats would support efforts to
reduce trade barriers and burdensome regulation." Because the terms of this
"grand bargain" are vague, it is hard to say what it will end up looking
like - but the mere fact that he is willing to regurgitate Money Party
talking points about further economic deregulation and "free" trade deals
calls into question whether he will continue representing the People Party
as he has for many years.
Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) - Leans People Party: Dingell has been a solid
consumer advocate on the Energy and Commerce Committee on many major
economic issues. But it is unclear how he will use his new chairmanship of
that committee in the minority. Suggesting allegiance to the People Party,
Dingell has told USA Today that he will work to cut America's dependence on
foreign oil [26]. Suggesting Dingell's allegiance to the Money Party, the
Associated Press reported that he may oppose efforts to allow seniors to
purchase lower-priced, FDA-approved medicines [27] from Canada - a proposal
vehemently opposed by the pharmaceutical industry that wants to use
protectionism to keep medicine prices artificially high in the United
States.
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) - Unclear Which Way She Leans: Clinton has not
really tried to define her public image on economic issues - and it is
unclear where her real loyalties are. Her views on lobbyist-written trade
deals is completely unclear, especially considering her ties to a Clinton
White House that championed the very "free" trade policies that sold out
American workers. Similarly, whereas her efforts in the 1990s to enact
universal health care were motivated by a desire to represent the People
Party, a report in the New York Times a few months ago showed that Clinton
is now the number two recipient of health care industry cash and is
returning the favor by publicly apologizing for her original health care
reform efforts [28]. Meanwhile, she this year headlined the DLC's national
conference - a very public rebuke of the People Party.
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) - Leans People Party: As I detailed in a long piece
for The Nation [29], Obama's instincts throughout his career have been to
strongly side with the People Party against the Money Party. That is true,
even if he also is more of a cautious Establishmentarian than a
power-challenger - and especially considering his recent moves to
potentially push full public financing of congressional elections [30].
However, he recently headlined the kickoff event for the so-called Hamilton
Project - the Wall Street backed front group whose goal is to undercut
Democratic efforts to seriously reform America's trade policy. He
additionally voted for the industry-written class action bill [31] that
limits citizens ability to seek legal redress against corporate abusers, he
voted for the oil industry-written Energy Bill [32], he voted against
legislation to crack down on exorbitant credit card interests rates [33],
and he voted for the Oman Free Trade Agreement [34]. In a presidential race,
I believe Obama will more fully embrace the People Party both because it
makes political sense and because I believe that's where his heart is. The
question will be whether those two factors will outweigh the pressure he
will face to join the Money Party and use his huge celebrity-driven
microphone to push the Money Party's agenda - pressures that may be
responsible for his relative silence on major economic justice issues in his
first two years in the Senate.
Let me reiterate - this in no way is a comprehensive list. There are many
others who are part of either the People Party or the Money Party, and I
encourage readers to list others that you think belong in both camps in the
comments section below (it is entirely possible I merely forgot some that
should be on this list in either camp). Additionally, I'm sure people may
disagree with me and have their own list - that's fine too, and I'm open to
the criticism/discussion/debate. As I said, because the People Party-Money
Party fault line is so rarely discussed in Washington, it is much harder to
know precisely how this divide breaks out. And remember, this isn't just
about the way these people have voted - it is also about whether they use
their platform/political capital to raise these economic justice issues that
Washington doesn't like talking about.
That said, this list should give people a pretty good idea of who some of
the major players will be in the new Congress on the fundamental economic
issues like corruption, trade and health care that defined the 2006
election. It will be up to us to support those representing the People Party
with everything we've got. At the same time, we as a movement must have the
courage to go up against those in the Money Party who are working against
us - even if they have a D behind their name. This People Party-Money Party
chasm is the one that means the difference not between which lawmakers get
which parking spots on Capitol Hill - but between whether the American
people get real change or not.
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson
