Y'know, I like
Delaware Dem. We agree on a lot of stuff, and I almost always like his take on issues. But I really, really disagree with his current recommended diary, in which he proclaims, "It's Over". I'm sorry DD, but that's just untrue. It's just beginning.
There are some huge challenges looming ahead of us. In the next four years our party is going to have to fight a Republican party that now very seriously threatens our nation's basic standards of living. We will have to fight to keep a man committed to torture from becoming our nation's attorney general. We will have to fight to preserve a woman's right to choose. We will have to fight to preserve a Supreme Court in which some semblance of non-partisan attitude is still a possibility. In the next four years we will very likely be forced to defend 30 years of Democratic policy on everything from race to poverty to the environment to civil liberties to government accountability. The Republicans have succeeded in tearing down the Great Society, today they are targeting the New Deal as well.
But as important as those battles are, they are not the most important fight facing us today.
The single most important battle facing us right now is for the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. After over a decade of constantly losing, scraping and bowing before Republican politicians as though they are our rightful superiors, Democrats must finally decide to stand up. We must regain the core confidence in our own values that allows us to fight, and allows us to genuinely advocate our belief system. As Democrats, we must be able to stand up and say: these are the values we represent, these are the freedoms we cherish, this is our vision for the nation we love.
There are powerful forces at work today that genuinely wish to browbeat liberals into a "loyalty oath" situation. With such immense problems looming on the horizon, many liberal Democrats might wonder if that is not a preferable outcome. Many Democrats claim that now is not the time for a leadership battle, and that we can only be served by maintaining the status quo. Once again, elements in the leadership of the Democratic party are strongly advocating unity over principle.
I say that is weak and counterproductive. We cannot and will not ever be a successful opposition party by taking safe stands which do not challenge the majority. That kind of weak, conciliatory behavior has led us to our current diseased condition. We have become a party that is craven in our fear, a party that projects abject weakness as it tries to appear "strong" by supporting whatever bloodthirsty Republican issue is presented before us. Today our party has become so nebulous and ill-defined that we very well may choose a leader like Tim Roemer, whose positions on many of our core issues are repugnant-- not merely to Democrats, but to all Americans.
Large majorities of Americans support reproductive rights, a balanced budget, and Social Security. For Democrats, those issues reprsent some very important and strongly held core values. Tim Roemer does not support them, but he has gotten the support of our Washington establishment despite that. This alone should be an indication that reform within our party is deeply needed. How can our party be led by a man who would willingly concede defeat on many of our most important beliefs-- let alone beliefs which are still widely shared by the American public?
Of course, Delaware Dem was specifically referring to the need to unify after the situation in Ohio. I agree that such unity is a desirable outcome. But unity gained by intimidation and force is the most fragile unity of all, and it wears off very quickly. For over a decade now, DLC Democrats have been demanding unity with the spectre of Republican domination-- even as their strategic decisions have allowed that very "worst case scenario" to emerge. The leadership's attempts to suppress internal dissent have grown more and more strident-- first targeting liberal politicians, then core Democratic interest groups, and finally even voters who support unauthorized candidates. Each attempt to shut down debate about the future of the party merely emboldens Al From's opponents, however, and today there is a very clear choice between sustainable unity or a final, major attempt to silence opposition that has the potential to utterly splinter the party and render it useless in the battles to come.
Ohio is the flashpoint here, and the Democrats' handling of this issue will be an important demonstration of their political skill. We can create a unified Democratic party which carries the unity of the Kerry campaign to new, sustained heights, but it will take wise leadership now, despite the raw feelings and strong emotions. There is a great deal of anger at the terrible abuses of democracy that occured in Ohio-- the voter intimidation, the strategic deprivation of minority polling places, the misinformation campaigns, the Jim Crow-eque legal wrangling to suppress black voters. Congressional Democrats can do a great deal to direct this anger at the real Republican enemies rather than themselves by merely taking it seriously and fighting to rectify the situation even though they have no chance to win.
Yes, I am advocating fighting a losing battle. Many Democrats, as they reiterated in their testimony today, find this idea repugnant-- they don't want to fight unless they know they're going to win. But there is value in fighting a losing battle when it is evocative of the ideals of our democratic society-- and free elections certainly are. If the Democrats-- perhaps led by John Kerry-- craft a bill or Constitutional Amendment that is specifically crafted to guarantee the right to vote for ALL PEOPLE, they could go a long way towards unifying the party and proving to Americans that Democrats do have genuine core values. If the leadership chooses to ignore these problems as they did in 2000, they will have squandered a major political opportunity and will have to deal with an angry and aroused base.
Election reform won't be the last battle, however. Ultimately, this battle for the party's heart will need to be fought between those who desperately seek reform and those who need the status quo. I have no doubt that the reform Democrats WILL eventually win, since it is very difficult to run a political party when you're antagonizing your most loyal supporters, but the nature of that victory will depend on the leadership. This can either be a slow and steady reform or a sharp revolution which throws the party into a period of ineffectual chaos. The actions of the party leadership will make all the difference in determining how reform takes place, but one thing is very certain: this is not over.
Reform Democrats are ready to see some major changes, and our 4 hours of political theater today are certainly not sufficient. We're going to take the party back, if not today then tomorrow or the day after. If anything, the forces of reform in the party are more grimly determined to see actual change after today's Boxer Rebellion than they were before. I hope the leadership is prepared.