BP did a great job addressing the Obama piece by David Sirota in the Nation
Specifically, the attack on Obama’s vote on a class action bill. The bill moved more class action claims into federal court instead of state courts. Trial lawyers were against this because federal judges tend to reign in such cases far more than state judges and ultimately it will probably lower the judgments.
The problem here is that it is a basic Constitutional problem. Most class action suits are about interstate commerce and as such belong in the one venue that is neutral to the parties. Madison County is an example where local judges are more likely to be influenced by local lawyers who are active locally while the company is often out of state or at least out of area. While I like to bash irresponsible corporations, as a basic matter of a good judicial system this bill made sense and it’s a case where Obama used good sense to think about how the problem should be dealt with. If we need to change the rules to make them more fair, than we can do that by passing other laws.
That’s a substantive problem I have with the piece, but more to the point, one of the great progressive victories of this century was obtained by a progressive who was initially a flame thrower.
One of the single best books on the Senate and separately on Civil Rights is The Walls of Jericho and it follows the path to Civil Rights with Hubert Humprhey’s election on through the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Humphrey came to the Senate and made speeches and lectured his colleagues and was quickly shut out of power. He started to make progress only as he became an institutionalist and learned to pull the institution with him through the rules of the Senate and he gained valuable allies including Lyndon Johnson.
To attempt to paint someone who is an institutionalist as less progressive ignores the institution and how it works. It is ahistorical.
If anything, Obama has been wise in respecting the institution and in doing so has been able to forge working alliances on critical progressive issues including contracting (with of all people-Coburn), he’s been working very hard against the creep of Voter ID bills that will likely disenchise millions if carried out across the nation, he’s been one of the strongest voices on Darfur (again with the bizarre pairing of Brownback), working toward nuclear weapons security, and despite Sirota’s dismissive mention of Veteran’s care, VA reform.
The difference drawn between Obama’s caution and Wellstone demonstrate an important difference. Wellstone blocked legislation—a vital thing to do sometimes. Obama is trying to legislate. Wellstone did too, but in many ways he was his best playing defense. But that is also a deeply institutional role in the US Senate where Wellstone had to use parliamentary tactics to delay the bankruptcy bill and thus often burning his capital with others. Personally, I think the two roles are complimentary.
The larger point is being progressive in the United States Senate is being an institutionalist. Humphrey learned it, Wellstone knew it, and Obama gets it.
These are all essential progressive issues that in some cases have support from some Republicans. It’s more than a little annoying to hear that VA Reform is mundane when we are in the middle of a war where we are producing more injured individuals in proportion to previous wars. The injured soldiers are most frequently working class kids who are often going to need care for the rest of their lives. Those already in the system, have been made a promise by this country and while it might seem mundane, it actually affects the daily lives of people who Democrats are supposed to care about.
The Bush Administration attack on the VA should be truly scandalous. Jim Nicholson is one of the worst examples of the hackocracy in this administration. He’s has taken a system that throughout the 1990s was turned into a reliable and trustworthy institution for veterans and sent it careening towards it’s inglorious past of being underfunded and undercaring.
If Obama could make an issue just plop on the national stage and get widespread attention, you’d think this would be it, but the press largely deals with it in small stories that do not address the systematic underfunding to help shift that money to Congress’ whims.
Energy development is a small thing? While I have signficant problems with the coal and ethanol initiatives he has pushed, it would seem to me that those are issues that working people count on every day.
The notion that carrots are liberal and sticks are progressive get to the root of the problem. Why are carrots liberal and sticks progressive? It’s just a claim with no support. Progressives might mistrust runaway corporate power, but why does the strategy matter as long as the results get there?
I guess what bothers me is that as Sirota has reinvented himself as the state policy guy, he’s ignoring one of the progressive victories in the states and it’s germane to this story.
Illinois has passed a pretty impressive series of progressive bills in the last few years. We certainly have unmet needs in the education area, but workers rights have been greatly improved and environmental protection (if not always conservations) is much better. More in the next post…