Ever since the Democratic Congress capitulated over the bill passed to enable Bush and the 'unitary executive' to continue domestic spying on Americans, there has been deserved outcry over the Democrats that supported the measure. This has occurred in large part due to Bush's ability to peel off Democrats who belong to the Blue Dog coalition. Chris Bowers and Matt Stoller over at Open Left have now started a project to hold these 'Bush Dogs' accountable for enabling a working conservative majority on the most important issues of the day despite their official allegiance to the Democratic Party. I believe this is an important project; that being said, I'd like to remind everyone that not all Blue Dogs are bad Democrats.
In fact, I want to highlight one Blue Dog in particular who has been on the right side of national security issues each time a vote has come up. He won one of the closest races in the country in 2006, and he's going to need the continued support of the netroots community to hold the seat in 2008. I'm talking about Rep. Patrick Murphy of Pennsylvania's 8th District.
Rep. Murphy is the only member of Congress to have served in the current conflict in Iraq, having served in the 82nd Airborne during his time in the country. His perspective on Iraq isn't one that can be gained by visiting the country and staying within the safest confines of the Green Zone. While some may have been disappointed by his decision to join the Blue Dogs and a similar group, the New Democrats, after his election to the House, he has been steadfast in showing his progressive credentials on matters that pertain to Iraq and to other national security-related matters, such as FISA. In February, Murphy co-sponsored a bill with Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) that would establish a binding timeline to bring the troops home. He supported HR 1591, the initial Democratic bill sent to Bush with a timeline for redeploying our troops. If you take a look at Murphy's page on Iraq legislation, you will see that the legislation he has voted on and introduced is much in line with what the progressive blogosphere believes when it comes to the Iraqi conflict: we need to get out, and we need to do it in a sensible manner. Below is a video of one of Murphy's emotional speeches on the House floor in support of changing our current policy:
In a recent interview, Murphy reiterates that his top priority in Congress is about getting us out of Iraq as soon as possible:
Goal number one? To get our troops out of Iraq. As soon as Murphy was in office, the House leadership made sure he was involved in a war budget that included timelines for withdrawal.
"And now I'm getting criticized by our vice president because I believe in timelines and he says I'm unpatriotic," Murphy said. "I'm not going to back down from anyone, not even the White House. I believe that people understand what is really going on. And it's time to start bringing our troops home and refocusing on Osama bin Laden, who was the cause of the attacks back on 9/11. But he's not in Iraq. He's in Afghanistan."
On the topic of the FISA bill, which gave rise to examining who the 'Bush Dogs' really are, an editorial by E.J. Dionne gave a look at Murphy's thoughts on the bill:
Several members from swing districts -- including Reps. Heath Shuler of North Carolina and Patrick J. Murphy of Pennsylvania -- expressed openness to having Congress stay in town to fight if important constitutional issues were at stake.
[...]
Most Democrats opposed the bill, but 41 (including Shuler) voted yes, allowing it to pass. (Murphy remained passionately opposed.)
Unlike most of his fellow coalition members, Murphy decided to stand up for the Fourth Amendment and the Constitution. Perhaps it his background as a professor of constitutional law at West Point that made his vote more informed. Regardless, though, Murphy isn't like the rest of the Blue Dogs. He isn't going to abandon his principles for the sake of putting on a show of bipartisanship. Furthermore, he can be counted on as a reliable progressive vote for issues that pertain to national security - whether it's on Iraq, warantless wiretapping, or any other issue that may come up.
Murphy won the 2006 election by a very slim margin - 1,521 votes out of about 250,000 cast. Although he has done a good job in fundraising to date - he has raised $1.2 million in the first six months of 2007 - he is still going to need our support. Considering that a potential challenger, Marine Corps Colonel Thomas Marino (father of a soldier killed in Iraq), is considering a run that would accuse Murphy of exploiting his military service (somewhat ironic, considering that Marino would ostensibly 'exploit' his family's service in a potential campaign), the race for PA-08 could be as tight, and possibly nastier, than it was in 2006. Since it is more than a year before the election, there aren't too many opportunities to volunteer. However, you can show your support for Murphy by dropping in some change for him at the link below.
Yes, the Blue Dogs have been (and will probably continue to be) a thorn in the side of the progressive community. However, don't forget Patrick Murphy - he's one of the true good guys, and he is on our side when he casts his votes in Congress.
STATE BLOGS
