Hillarysworld

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info
TOPIC: "Where Do Democrats Go Next?" (Sen.Evan Bayh, NYTimes.com 11/2/10)


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
"Where Do Democrats Go Next?" (Sen.Evan Bayh, NYTimes.com 11/2/10)
Permalink  
 


Read @ NYTimes.com

Where Do Democrats Go Next?

Indianapolis

DEMOCRATS can recover from the disappointments of this election and set the stage for success in 2012. But to do so we must learn from Tuesday’s results.

[SNIP]

It is clear that Democrats over-interpreted our mandate. [snip]

[SNIP]

With these lessons in mind, Democrats can begin to rebuild. Where to start?

First, we have more than a communications problem — the public heard us but disagreed with our approach. Democrats need not reassess our goals for America, but we need to seriously rethink how to reach them.

Second, don’t blame the voters. They aren’t stupid or addled by fear. They are skeptical about government efficacy, worried about the deficit and angry that Democrats placed other priorities above their main concern: economic growth.

So, in the near term, every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow?

A good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.

The stereotype of Democrats as wild-eyed spenders and taxers has been resurrected. To regain our political footing, we must prove to moderates that Democrats can make tough choices. Democrats should ban earmarks until the budget is balanced. The amount saved would be modest — but with ordinary Americans sacrificing so much, the symbolic power of politicians cutting their own perks is huge.

Democrats should support a freeze on federal hiring and pay increases. Government isn’t a privileged class and cannot be immune to the times.

The most important area for spending restraint is entitlement reform. Democrats should offer changes to the system that would save hundreds of billions of dollars while preserving the safety net for our neediest. For instance, we could introduce “progressive indexation,” which would provide lower cost-of-living increases for more affluent Social Security recipients, or devise a more accurate measure of inflation’s effects on all recipients’ income.

Democrats should also improve legislation already enacted. Health care reform, financial regulation and other initiatives were first attempts at solving complex problems, not holy writ. The administration’s grant of sensible exemptions to the health care bill, permitting some employers to offer only basic coverage, is an example of common-sense, results-oriented fine-tuning.

If President Obama and Congressional Democrats were to take these and other moderate steps on tax reform, deficit reduction and energy security, they would confront Republicans with a quandary: cooperate to make America more prosperous and financially stable, running the risk that the president would likely receive the credit, or obstruct what voters perceive as sensible solutions.

Having seen so many moderates go down to defeat in this year’s primaries, few Republicans in Congress will be likely to collaborate. And as the Republicans — including the party’s 2012 presidential candidates — genuflect before the Tea Party and other elements of the newly empowered right wing, President Obama can seize the center.

I’m betting the president and his advisers understand much of this. If so, assuming the economy recovers, President Obama can win re-election; Democrats can set the stage for historic achievements in a second term. The extremes of both parties will be disappointed. But the vast center yearning for progress will applaud, and the country will benefit.

Evan Bayh, a Democratic senator from Indiana, is retiring from the Senate in January.


===============

Good article and some very good suggestions.  Yes if GOP keels to the extreme right, the POTUS does indeed have a chance to take a center [provided he truly changes his way of communicating/interfacing with people] now that bipartisanship is forced and a given right off the gate.  A lot of moderates are out of the Senate and the House now.. so the task of bringing consensus is actually much harder; advantage is that GOP cannot say, you have the majority and we'll watch you from the sideline and blame you.


On an aside, perhaps the one takeaway here is to never give supermajority to either party. It only promotes unhealthy behavior in the Congress.

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!


Platinum

Status: Offline
Posts: 460
Date:
Permalink  
 

advantage is that GOP cannot say, you have the majority and we'll watch you from the sideline and blame you.


Actually they can since the Dems still control 2/3rds of the federal government, Senate and POTUS.  If they put the blinders up to what the electorate told them yesterday regarding their platform, the Dems will be holding the door wide open for a Republican POTUS.  Here is where we are going to find out if Obama is as great a student of history as he claims.

Will he learn from the "Big Dawg" and move to the center or will he continue to try and push his agenda that received quite the no-vote last night?

Next year and a half will be interesting.

__________________
Don't blame me...I voted HILLARY!

http://www.barefootfoundation.com/index_en.php

http://www.savethechildren.org/


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
Permalink  
 

Yes, VH, you are correct definitely on anything budgetary the senate would need to have 2/3rd majority.  So, let's hope they dont get enough Dems to go with them on fiscal agenda that simply increases the wealth divide.

On the social agenda side...

I hope things like Equal Rights Amendment and START get ratified in the Senate.

On the other hand, there are social agenda items that are on the conservative side that worry me. Do you think they might push conservative social agenda?  They only need majority.. and in senate there are enough social conservatives...  I am concerned that the conservatives will ramroad the Smith Bill, buiding ont he executive order they squeezed out earlier this year.

Yes, next year and a half will be very interesting... indeed!


-- Edited by Sanders on Wednesday 3rd of November 2010 11:23:02 PM

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!


Platinum

Status: Offline
Posts: 179
Date:
Permalink  
 

Oh I don't know Sanders, I'm willing to bet in the next few weeks, before January, we see a whole lot of headines saying "Big Dawg to the Rescue".

__________________


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 798
Date:
Permalink  
 

Obama is not a strong man, and he didn't listen then, and he won't listen now. He just doesn't have it in him.

__________________


Platinum

Status: Offline
Posts: 163
Date:
Permalink  
 

Building 4112 wrote:

Obama is not a strong man, and he didn't listen then, and he won't listen now. He just doesn't have it in him.




Obama doesn't care what anybody says - he never has.  He's so frickin' delusional that he believes all the crap he spews out and he truly believes HE knows best.  It will be his way or no way.  He won't listen to anyone and honestly, he doesn't care if he's a one term president.  All he wanted was the title.  He's got that and he's just trying to skate by until he can make his escape.



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard