Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz is one of the smartest new members of Congress. She was first elected in 2004, and already she's a 'cardinal' of one of the Appropriations subcommittees, the one that controls money for the Legislative branch. In her purview is the Library of Congress, the Congressional Research Service, and the Capitol itself. One of the most annoying boondoggles over the last few years is the Capitol Visitors Center. The CVC is an affront to Congress, a huge construction site directly in front of the Capitol building that is overbudget, and it was supposed to be completed in 2002....
Power in DC rests in all sorts of strange places, but it's mostly related to the energy and vigor with which individuals are willing to aggressively tackle problems. Wasserman-Schultz is one to watch; if she's able to use her perch to crack skulls on such a ridiculous and embarrassing boondoggle that Republicans wouldn't touch for their ten years in Congress, she's going to be an impressive and important force for change for years.
I write this because reporter Adam Smith of the influential blog The Buzz in Florida quoted me saying the following.
She gave $1,000 to Dan Lipinski...He's an extraordinarily conservative Democrat, a Rush Limbaugh listener in a plus-10 Democratic district. I don't know if she's progressive or not, but I have my doubts where her loyalty lies. I don't believe these people any more." She seems to have charmed him into softening his skepticism, based on his post on the event linked above.
My interview was much longer, and this was one of the few quotes he chose to use. But I'll point out that it's not a contradiction to admire her political skills, energy, and leadership capacity while remaining confused about her priorities. Here are some of her Bush Dog contributions since 2007: Jason Altmire, John Barrow, Melissa Bean Luburich, Leonard Boswell, Chris Carney, Joe Donnelly, Chet Edwards, Brad Ellsworth, Ciro Rodriguez, Heath Shuler, Zack Space, Charlie Stenholm, Dan Lipinski, and Tim Walz.
And here are her incumbent non-Bush Dog contributions since 2007: Mike Arcuri, John Hall, Joe Courtney, Gabrielle Giffords, Kirsten Gillibrand, Paul Hodes, Steve Kagen, Ron Klein, Tim Mahoney, Harry Mitchell, Patrick Murphy, John Yarmuth, and Robert Wexler.
That's 14 Bush Dogs who voted to fund the war and for illegal wiretapping who received money from Wasserman Schultz, versus 13 non-Bush Dogs. Of the non-Bush Dogs, only 4 of them (Hall, Courtney, Hodes, and Yarmuth) are actually progressive. Of course Wasserman Schultz is a party leader, and most of these recipients are vulnerable freshmen who she is required to help by virtue of her position at the DCCC. In addition, a party leader trying to build a power base in the House would show exactly this giving pattern (along with the inexplicable donation to Lipinski). And that's why I don't know if she's progressive or not, since she keeps supporting people who aren't as part of her power base. Does she want to jump move up or does she actually want to lead a progressive Congress? People like Wasserman Schultz and Chris Van Hollen who raise progressive money and give it to Bush Dogs can and should be judged according to their actions.
And given the low general regard for Congress, and its condemnation of Moveon, it would simply be foolish to give these people the benefit of the doubt. I imagine that it's going to take a few years for the situation to change, and I would be extraordinarily surprised if Wasserman Schultz doesn't eventually become an aggressive leader with a strong base of progressives, but that's not where she's building up her power right now. When I wrote that I don't know where her loyalties lie, and that I don't trust these people anymore, it's because both of those statements are true. Shouldn't we judge people by their actions and not their statements? |
STATE BLOGS
