Dan Sherrier

Remember that ordeal in New York recently? When the Republican establishment backed a left-leaning candidate, until conservatives led by Sarah Palin rallied around a third-party candidate who held views more strongly in line with their values?

Pundits had a field day with that one, as they carried on about the GOP being taken over by the “radical right,” which sought to purge the party of moderates.

Sorry, not progressive enough. Gotta go.

This was hailed as a horrible situation for the Republican Party that would no doubt favor the Democrats in elections. The general tenor equated to “those stupid conservatives, sabotaging their own party!” followed by a “Ha! Ha!” similar to that bully kid from The Simpsons.

DNC Chairman Tim Kaine said in a Nov. 4 statement, “However, perhaps the most consequential race of the night was the special election in the 23rd Congressional District of New York in which the Republican candidate, a moderate, was purged from the Republican Party by the most extreme elements of the conservative right wing including Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

“This race turned out to be the worst of all possible worlds for Republicans as not only did the Democrat, Bill Owens, win a seat that Democrats have not held in more than 100 years, but what occurred in New York has exposed a war within the Republican Party that will not soon end. It played itself out in Pennsylvania earlier this year when longtime Republican Senator Arlen Specter became a Democrat and is playing itself out in House, Senate and Gubernatorial races nationwide. The all out war between Republicans and the far right wing is a disaster for the Republican Party and will dog it well after today.”

Now take a look at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC).

They have ads seeking to “hold accountable” Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) for not being “progressive” enough in the current health care debate.

Recently, I received an e-mail from this organization stating, “This week, ‘Blue Dogs’ and other bad Democrats voted to kill health care reform. They betrayed us on this core Democratic issue. It’s payback time.”

The e-mail lists five “targets,” all Congressional Democrats (from the House, not the senators already mentioned.)

“Can you chip in $25 to hold them accountable? Then, please forward this to others. Thanks for being a bold progressive,” the e-mail concludes.

How is this substantially different from what conservatives hoped to accomplish in the NY-23 race? These self-styled “progressives” want Democrats to conform to their values. They have every right to advocate to that effect, just as others have every right to advocate for a more conservative Republican party. It’s all part of the democratic process.

While I can respect the PCCC for standing up for what it believes in, I do have to criticize their tactics.

One of its ads shows a woman expressing her disappointment in Republican Snowe for following her party in its opposition to the public health insurance option. She said she hoped Snowe would be more “independent.”

But only Republicans should be independent, apparently. Democrats need to stick to the party line and back the public option–or else it’s betrayal, as the e-mail indicated, making them “bad Democrats.”

The strategy behind the video ads is weak. To advocate for the public option, the PCCC shows us everyday citizens telling us about how the current health insurance system has resulted in tragic hardships for them and their families, and we’re supposed to feel so sorry for them that we give in and shout, “Yes! We need that public option so no one else will suffer as they have!”

I have no reason to doubt the authenticity of these people’s stories, and I do feel bad. There are flaws in the current system, and people have had horrible experiences as a result.

Let’s say we add in that public option and insure millions more. Well, if we don’t also greatly increase the number of doctors at the same time, the industry will not be equipped to handle every patient seeking care, which would result in severe hardships for some people–though perhaps just different people than those who would suffer severe hardships under the current system.

The PCCC says that the greedy insurance companies need more competition, but it acts like the public option is the one and only way to accomplish that objective. How about we start with allowing people to purchase health insurance across state lines? Do that, and suddenly those insurance companies are competing against many more companies–as state governments themselves are competing in terms of what regulations they choose to mandate. It wouldn’t solve all problems, but it might solve some.

But the PCCC doesn’t want us to think. It wants us to feel, and it manipulates our emotions to that effect (though it’s hardly the only political organization–or the only segment of the political spectrum–to do so.) The videos try to frighten us into believing that we, too, might find ourselves losing a loved one or plunging into impossible debt because there’s no public option.

You’d think that a group called the Progressive Change Campaign Committee would be about more than public health insurance. If it is, it’s hard to tell from the Web site.

They do have an ad denouncing Rush Limbaugh for comments made in regard to the Supreme Court’s newest justice, Sonia Sotomayor, plus a call to censure Rep. Joe “You lie!” Wilson (which did stem from the health care issue.) There’s not much more than that and the pro-public option videos on the site’s “Campaigns” page. A portion of the home page indicates that members don’t want abortion restricted (which also pertains to the health care bill.)

I searched for a set of guiding principles, trying to determine precisely how this group defined “progressive” and what members look for in candidates they support.

On the “Mission” page, it simply says, “The Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) works to elect bold progressive candidates to federal office and to help those candidates and their campaigns save money, work smarter, and win more often.

“We also advocate for bold leadership on the most important and pressing causes. Read about our recent issue campaigns, and sign up to join our fight.” (A link they have here sends you to the page of video ads I’ve just talked about.)

The rest of the page is pretty much about supporting “progressive” candidates overlooked by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. But there’s no explanation of what they consider progressive.

Compare this to a conservative activist group, Americans for Prosperity. On their Web site, they lay out precisely what they believe in. Whether you like them or not, they’re very open and clear about what they stand for.

With the PCCC, they want a public option, and their dislikes include Rush Limbaugh and restrictions on abortion. That’s as forthcoming as these folks get with their beliefs.

I suppose an announcement of “We love statism!” might turn some people away.

We’re still a center-right country. If the PCCC–whose members apparently don’t even feel comfortable enough to lay out a full policy platform or set of principles–if they want to get rid of the Blue Dogs in favor of further-left Democrats, that might increase the electability of moderate or rightwing Republicans. (Remember, President Obama campaigned as a moderate, not a progressive.) So I say go for it. Knock yourselves out.

16 Responses to “Radical left tries to drive moderates out of Democratic Party”