This is a picture of Donna Edwards during debate prep for the NAACP forum.
In a piece titled The Broken Market for Democratic Primaries in October, I laid out the serious structural problems facing us because of the lack of intraparty democracy within the Democratic Party. One, lacking primary challenges means that we over-allocate resources to letter writing and advocacy instead of the electoral process where voters can weigh in. Two, democracy is a core progressive value that makes us stronger, and lacking challengers means we lack the capacity for democracy within our party. Three, a lack of primaries disenfranchises Democratic primary voters in all districts and general election voters in safe districts. Four, primaries are a check on calcification and corruption within the party, and the lack of them creates decay.
We're already seeing the consequences of the Edwards victory, and it's looking like great news for progressives, and bad news for incumbent Democrats. And frankly, the same dynamic applies to Dennis Kucinich and his primary challenge, as he has been forced to respond to the voters who put him in office. But the progressive dynamic in Maryland's fourth is more interesting because of institutional shifts like this.
The powerhouse health care union 1199-SEIU is celebrating the upset primary victory yesterday of liberal Maryland Democratic insurgent Donna Edwards against eight-term moderate incumbent Rep. Albert Wynn.
The New York-based union, which also has members in Maryland, the District of Columbia, and Massachusetts, invested big in Edwards, spending several hundred thousand dollars in independent expenditures on her behalf, including $175,000 on mailers alone.
Union insiders say the Maryland effort should be viewed as a warning to New York Democrats, indicating that 1199 is not going to shy away from backing candidates it views as more progressive and friendly to its issues against incumbent Dems in the state Senate and Congress.
This is happening across all the interest groups involved in Maryland's fourth. EMILY's List, the League of Conservation Voters, SEIU, UNITE-HERE, Moveon, Friends of the Earth, and Progressive Maryland have all become emboldened by this race.
And there's more.
Recall that 1199 has traditionally been a close ally of the Senate Republicans, but this union - like so many others - has been hedging its bets for some time now, giving money to both sides of the aisle in expectation that the Democrats will soon take control of the Senate.
A number of intra-party state Senate primaries are already shaping up for this September - Stewart vs. Parker, Connor vs. Squadron, Monserrate vs. Sabini, Baldeo vs. Addabbo, just to name a few (I'm sure there are more percolating out there, given the 2009 term-limit problem so many Council members are facing).
The Senate Democrats have signaled that what they care about is keeping Democratic seats in Democratic hands, but not necessarily protecting incumbents, since resources are already limited for GOP-on-Democrat races.
It's unlikely that 1199 will be alone in backing Democrats against other Democrats this fall. Look for the Empire State Pride Agenda to possibly get involved in trying to flip seats that are currently held by lawmakers opposed to same-sex marriage, regardless of party affiliation.
UPDATE: George Gresham, president of 1199, released a statement congratulating Edwards on her "amazing victory," saying that she had defeated Wynn "against all odds."
1199 is now using the primary process within the Democratic party rather than backing Republicans. That is a huge and excellent strategic shift that progressives everywhere should applaud.
One of the most important, in fact, the most important consequence of this race is the precedent it sets for enticing good people into the primary process as candidates. It's undeniable that Donna Edwards was immensely talented and dedicated as a candidate, and there aren't many like her willing to buck the system in politics. However, there are many like her in America, people like Al Franken and Steven Colbert, who can learn politics and apply the professionalism they exhibit in their lives to this craft. These talented community leaders don't want to become the next Ned Lamont, because Lamont is not a Senator. As activists we think Lamont was a good race, but candidates don't run to make a point but to get into office. I've made a good number of calls around the country to recruit primary candidates to incumbents, and it is really hard. What could I say, you'll be just like Ned Lamont, a hero but not a Senator who also happens to have hundreds of millions of dollars? By contrast, Donna isn't wealthy, and she is going to be in Congress.
The second important consequences is that outside grups are moving resources away from inefficient advocacy and towards the electoral process. This will create a virtuous cycle of increased competitiveness within the party, increased responsiveness to constituents and voters, and eventually, better decision-making by political elites.
The third consequence is that Donna Edwards's message, a strong anti-corporate argument based on progressive values, worked. This was not a localized race but a nationalized one, and the internal polling showed that people care about the Bankruptcy Bill, the foreclosure crisis, energy costs, the war, and telecom influence in DC. Donna's ads and the outside groups were organized around these themes, not just of corruption but of a specific form of corporate corruption. The attacks on corporate interests in both parties should accelerate, Lou Dobbs-ian on the right and Donna Edwards-esque on the left. There are no more free votes for pro-corporate legislation, and members will pay for taking telecom money because voters get the connection at this point between right-wing corporate socialism, campaign contributions, and the mess in Washington.
It's worth noting as well that Rahm Emanuel comes out looking pretty good in this fight, and Steny Hoyer and Nancy Pelosi do not. Rahm gave to Lipinski but not Wynn, Hoyer and Pelosi not only gave to Wynn (and not Lipinski), but they put their credibility on the line in a public manner in the district. Wynn used their names in his literature, justifying his vote for the Bankruptcy Bill by saying that Hoyer voted for it as well. And he was crushed. Pelosi and Hoyer don't carry much weight with voters.
Still, let's not overstate this and suggest that every corporate Democrat is in trouble. Most likely, what will happen is a turnover via open seats, not a mass unseating of incumbents. Corporate Democrats (and Republicans) are still politicians, and the move left of the country will change their behavior; only the worst of them will be picked off, as it's obvious that without strong local dissatisfaction against a candidate, even with a talented candidate, it's incredibly difficult to beat an incumbent in a primary.
But this is a big deal, and behavioral changes are already starting in the Energy and Commerce Committee, shifts you will never know were due to this primary and that will never be reported. But they are happening.
|
STATE BLOGS
