HOME | BIO | MUSIC | JOURNEYS BY DJ | STUDIO BLOG | POLITICAL BLOG | BOOKING INFO | CONTACT

I'm posting this entry from Matt Yglesias here in full so that I don't forget tomorrow (when I start blogging again. ahem) to comment on it:

Brian Beutler on the Democrats' bad week. One thing that should be added here is that a lot of Democratic members of congress are unprepared for the new realities of American legislative life because, for the members, those realities basically suck. The days of weak party discipline and relatively low levels of partisan/ideological alignment meant that life as a member of the US House of Representatives was much more pleasant than was life as a member of parliament in Canada or France or what have you.

Consequently, a lot of members would like to believe that with the Big Bad DeLay gone they can somehow resuscitate the grand old days of cross-cutting coalitions and free-agent members rather than the dreary business of party discipline and endless legislative trench warfare.

In the real world, though, the causes of partisan polarization are structural and DeLay and Gingrich were just symptoms, or perhaps smart people who understood how to take advantage of the new realities.

UPDATE: To follow up...

Matt gets at one of two critical problems - one short term and one long term - facing Democrats in Congress today. The causes of polarization are in fact structural, a fact that everyone - that includes you, Sierra Club! - needs to accept as a long term shift. Shorter term, however, there is a second problem of overriding importance, one that neither Matt nor Brian have considered here. Fortunately, between yesterday and today, Publius covered this in full:

Democrats can’t alter the laws of mathematics. If they lack numbers, I don’t understand what exactly they’re supposed to do.

Democrats can’t transform Republicans into non-Republicans. Yes, Democrats control Congress, but not by much. For practical purposes, the parties basically have 50/50 support. The Senate, however, requires 60/40 support, while overriding a veto requires 2/3 support. So again -- what exactly are Democrats supposed to do differently?

In the face of inferior numbers, there’s only one thing to do -- politicize issues and tee them up for the next election. And on that front, the Democrats were wildly successful...

We’re seeing the exact same dynamic with the war and the Webb bill. The Democrats are being blamed by Democrats for Republican votes. But if Republicans continue voting this way, there are going to be fewer and fewer Republicans in the next session. It’s not ideal -- the ideal would be to end the war, to pass the Webb bill, to enact SCHIP. But the Democrats lost the 2004 election. If you want to blame someone, blame the American people. Blame Republicans. But I don’t understand why the Democrats keep getting so much blame.

People need to stop wishing for magical ponies. The Democrats in Congress don't have the constitutionally mandated numbers needed to override a presidential veto. Republicans will not break ranks to provide them with the numbers they need. Thus, the only way things will change is if more Democrats are voted into office in 2008. Until then, we are at an impasse. It may be unfortunate, painful, and even tragic at times, but it is our reality. If you want to change it, that's wonderful, but let's be realistic about this, OK?

UPDATE II: More here from Josh and Atrios on how the media fits into all this.