[Mb-civic] D.L.C.: Democrats Love Corporations?

[ean at sbcglobal.net]

http://www.alternet.org/election04/20774/

D.L.C.: Democrats Love Corporations?

  By David J. Sirota

(The Nation, Dec. 17) -- Looking out over Washington, DC, from his 
plush office, Al From is once again foaming at the mouth. The CEO of the
corporate-sponsored Democratic Leadership Council and his wealthy 
cronies
are in their regular postelection attack mode. Despite wins by economic
populists in red states like Colorado and Montana this year, the DLC is
claiming like a broken record that progressive policies are hurting the
Democratic Party.

 From's group is funded by huge contributions from multinationals like
Philip Morris, Texaco, Enron, and Merck, which have all, at one point or
another, slathered the DLC with cash. Those resources have been used to
push a nakedly corporate agenda under the guise of "centrism" while
allowing the DLC to parrot GOP criticism of populist Democrats as far-left
extremists.

 Worse, the mainstream media follow suit, characterizing progressive
positions on everything from trade to healthcare to taxes as
ultra-liberal. As the AP recently claimed, "party liberals argue that the
party must energize its base by moving to the left" while "the DLC and
other centrist groups argue that the party must court moderates and find a
way to compete in the Midwest and South."

 Is this really true? Is a corporate agenda really "centrism"? Or is it
only "centrist" among Washington's media elite, influence peddlers, and
out-of-touch political class? The American Heritage Dictionary defines
"centrism" as "the political philosophy of avoiding the extremes of right
and left by taking a moderate position." So to find out what is really
"mainstream," the best place to look is public polling data.

 Let's start with economic policy. The DLC and the press claim 
Democrats who attack President Bush and the Republicans for siding with
the superwealthy are waging "class warfare," which they claim will hurt
Democrats at the ballot box. Yet almost every major poll shows Americans
already essentially believe Republicans are waging a class war on behalf
of the rich – they are simply waiting for a national party to give voice
to the issue. In March 2004, for example, a Washington Post poll found a
whopping 67 percent of Americans believe the Bush administration favors
large corporations over the middle class.

 The "centrists" tell Democrats not to hammer corporations for their
misbehavior and not to push for a serious crackdown on corporate excess,
for fear the party will be hurt by an "anti-business" image. Yet such a
posture, pioneered by New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, is
mainstream: A 2002 Washington Post poll taken during the height of the
corporate accounting scandals found that 88 percent of Americans distrust
corporate executives, 90 percent want new corporate regulations/tougher
enforcement of existing laws, and more than half think the Bush
administration is "not tough enough" in fighting corporate crime.

 On taxes, self-described "centrists" like Senator Joe Lieberman, a 
senior DLC leader, attacked proposals to repeal the Bush tax cuts to pay
down the deficit. Yet even the DLC's pollster found in 2001 that a
majority of Americans support such a policy, and that a strong plurality
of voters would actually be more likely to vote for a Democrat who
endorsed this proposal. Lieberman caricatured those in favor of repeal as
extreme, claiming a repeal would alienate millions of voters who
supposedly feel the tax cut helped them. Yet a September 2004 CBS News
poll found that 72 percent of Americans say they have either not been
affected by the Bush tax cuts or that their taxes have actually gone up.

 On healthcare, we are led to believe that it is a "liberal," "left" or
"socialist" position to support a single-payer system that would provide
universal coverage to all Americans. But if you believe the Washington
Post, that would mean America was some sort of hippie commune. The
newspaper's 2003 national poll found that almost two-thirds of Americans
say they prefer a universal healthcare system "that's run by the
government and financed by taxpayers" as opposed to the current private,
for-profit system.

 Same thing with prescription drugs. DLCers like Senators John Breaux 
and
Evan Bayh, who both pocket thousands from the pharmaceutical industry,
have vehemently opposed bipartisan legislation allowing Americans to
import lower-priced, FDA-approved medicines from Canada. But polls
consistently show overwhelming support for the proposal. A March 2004 
AP
poll, for instance, showed that two-thirds of Americans favor making it
"easier for people to buy prescription drugs from Canada or other
countries at lower cost." The measure is so popular among average
Americans that even some ardent Republicans like Senator Trent Lott have
been embarrassed into supporting it. But apparently the same can't be said
for some corporate factions of the Democratic Party.

 On energy policy, those who want government to mandate higher fuel 
efficiency in cars are labeled "lefties," even though a 2004 Consumers
Union poll found that 81 percent of Americans support the policy.
Corporate apologists claim this "extremist" policy would hurt Democrats 
in
places like Michigan, where the automobile manufacturers employ 
thousands.
But the Sierra Club's 2004 polling finds more than three-quarters of
Michigan voters support it – including 84 percent of the state's
autoworkers.

 Even in the face of massive job loss and outsourcing, the media are still
labeling corporate Democrats' support for free trade as "centrist." And
the DLC, which led the fight for NAFTA and the China trade deal, attacks
those who want to renegotiate those pacts as just a marginal group of
"protectionists." Yet a January 2004 PIPA/University of Maryland poll
found that "a majority [of the American public] is critical of U.S.
government trade policy."

 A 1999 poll done on the five-year anniversary of the North American 
trade
deal was even more telling: Only 24 percent of Americans said they 
wanted
to "continue the NAFTA agreement." The public outrage at trade deals has
been so severe, pollster Steve Kull noted, that support dropped even 
among
upper-income Americans "who've most avidly supported trade and
globalization [and] who've taken the lead in pushing the free-trade agenda
forward."

 Despite this overwhelming evidence, Democrats in Washington apparently
have not gotten the message that their current definition of "centrism" is
actually pulling the party further and further out of the mainstream.
Instead, insiders are doing their best ostrich imitation: putting their
heads in the sand, pretending nothing is wrong and continuing down the
same path that sells out America's working class – the demographic that
used to be the party's base.

 For instance, the DLC has issued a "heartland strategy," telling 
Democrats to jettison economic populism, which has been used to elect
Democrats in various red regions in America. Their solution? "Talk more
about reducing teen pregnancy and out-of-wedlock births, which have led 
to
an expansion of single-parent families beset by poverty, welfare
dependence, and other social ills."

 Above all else, they caution, do not turn up "the volume on 
anti-business and class warfare themes" – a euphemism for not 
discussing DLC-backed free-trade policies that have ravaged economies
throughout the heartland. The strategy conveniently avoids the issues that
might make the DLC's corporate backers uncomfortable.

 Now an effort is under way to set this faux "centrism" in stone. One of
the leading candidates for Democratic National Committee chairman is 
Simon
Rosenberg, a former free-trade lobbyist and head of the business-backed
New Democrat Network. His group is joined by even more organizations
designed to push the party to the right. The Washington Post reports that
a group calling itself the "Third Way" (read: "Wrong Way") is forming to
tout "centrist" policies for Democrats. Instead of leaving the Beltway and
holding a town meeting to gauge the pulse of red America's working-class
core, the group held its initial meeting "over dinner at a Georgetown
mansion." Instead of engaging in grassroots funding efforts, it is openly
relying on corporate contributions.

 "The answer to the ideological extremes of the right has to be more than
rigid dogma from the left," said Senator Bayh, a leader of the new group
and one of Washington's most highly trumpeted "centrists." But really, 
who
is pushing a rigid dogma: these bankrolled politicians who have hijacked
"centrism" to sell out America's middle class, or the progressive
populists who most often have the backing of the American people?



-- 
You are currently on Mha Atma's Earth Action Network email list, 
option D (up to 3 emails/day).  To be removed, or to switch options 
(option A - 1x/week, option B - 3/wk, option C - up to 1x/day, option 
D - up to 3x/day) please reply and let us know!  If someone 
forwarded you this email and you want to be on our list, send an 
email to ean at sbcglobal.net and tell us which option you'd like.



Action is the antidote to despair.  ----Joan Baez
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20041218/f1e369f9/attachment.html