The fight over the Energy and Commerce chairmanship is really the fight over the next Congress, and all their forces are gathered to protect John Dingell's slow-walk stance on global warming. The lobbying of the newly elected members if furious, on both sides. Now, you're going to hear a lot of polite talk about how Dingell has a respectable plan on climate change that is less aggressive than the progressive alternative on climate change, but that's DC nonsense borne of a fear of the vindictive Dingell. Dingell's plan doesn't even start capping carbon emissions until 2030. It's a non-starter. It's designed by the coal and auto industry, and its authors even want to preempt existing California mandates on carbon emissions.
But Dingell is good on health care. Well, by good, I mean he has pushed 'single-payer' for literally decades, while preventing action on drug prices and appointing most of the members of the Energy and Commerce Committee that killed Clinton's health care plan, because they were reliable pro-auto industry votes on other issues Dingell prioritized (there aren't a lot of single payer pro-polluting members out there). But health care is all Dingell has, so he's emphasizing his willingness to work on health care with Obama in return for keeping his chairmanship of the enormously powerful Energy and Commerce Committee. Obama has appointed Waxman's former Chief of Staff Phil Schiliro as his Congressional liaison, and his EPA transition chief, Robert Sussman, is on record rejecting Dingell's bill out of hand, even as a starting point. Unlike the Lieberman fight, where Obama is putting his thumb on the scale for Lieberman, it's not clear if Obama will meddle in the House, even though Waxman's take on most E&C issues - including net neutrality and broadband - are far more in sync with the incoming administration than Dingell's.
So it's a caucus fight. And in that sense, Waxman, like Pelosi, is simply more progressive on the merits of industrial policy, and that's a very powerful incentive for what is an increasing progressive caucus. Over 150 Democrats supported Waxman's 'principles' for climate change by signing this letter which commits to four elements: reduce emissions to avoid dangerous global warming, build a clean energy economy, mitigate economic impacts of global warming legislation, and mitigate impacts of climate change on communities and ecosystems. This includes Dingell supporters like the immensely awful New Jersey Congressman Rob Andrews, so these aren't all Waxman votes. But it's a good floor to work from.
So far, Dingell has K Street behind him with a letter from chief of staff Michael Robbins to lobbyists:
As you have probably heard, Chairman Dingell quickly organized a whip team and began making phone calls. The response has been outstanding. Chairman Dingell locked up a substantial number of commitments across the caucus yesterday including Blue Dogs, New Dems, CBC and CHC Members, California members, leadership, and freshmen.
Additionally, center-right local press, right-wing pundits and organizations support Dingell with sentences like this: "In our history, few members of Congress have been held in such broad bipartisan respect as John Dingell has since taking office in 1955." The polluters are going all out for Dingell, but much of the action on the liberal side is opaque. So far, Moveon, the most outspoken opponent against Dingell, having run Dingell-saurus radio ads against him for his stance on climate change and incurred his wrath, is silent. Much of the environmental space is silent. And the blog space is largely focused on Lieberman.
What's interesting is to watch as the freshman class we just elected is shaped by this internal fight, away from the public eye. And it's shaped by two competing visions of liberalism. Dingell, an old industrial liberal who voted against the war, wants single payer health care and subsidies to polluters and drug companies and automakers, and is against action on climate change, and the other, a bad war vote with excellent follow-up investigations challenging the Bush administration and the hedge fund industry, a long-time progressive who believes there is no trade-off between the economy and the environment. This is not a simple left-right dichotomy, though Dingell has insulted Waxman by calling him a left-wing anti-manufacturing Democrat. It is, though, becoming a simple left-right dichotomy, even as someone who was once one of the most liberal icons of Congress moves more and more into the corner of the reactionary forces that will bake our planet.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment. blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
