I agree with most of what you say heartily, but a few quibbles.
> . . .
> 1992- The 1992 reapportionment created a massive jump in the ranks of the
> Congressional Black and Hispanic Caucuses, jumping the Congressional Black
> Caucus alone up to 39 members. . . .
Yes but in at least some cases, the majority-minority districts were created at the expense of some higher number of marginally-Democratic districts, so the gains to the black caucus were not without cost. That's why the Bushies supported the creation of the districts. I wouldn't claim that the result was definitely worse, only that it is at least debatable. It's nice to have a stronger voice and message on some issues, but it's not good (least of all, for the minority reps) to have no control over committees.
The boll weavils influence is indeed in eclipse. The DLC types have come to the position that they need liberals and labor, so the associated bashing has been and will be curtailed significantly. A dynamic that will play out is that any Administration position that affronts the liberals will hurt Gore's chances for a smooth path to nomination, so Gore has an important interest in curbing such policies. A good test case will be what the Administration does regarding Fast Track. Another will, of course, be the big enchilada of Social Security.
> . . .
> I've heard that in places like Alabama, the recent mobilization for the
> election is leading to a wholesale reorganization of the party led by
> progressives. Which highlights one of the massive changes in the Dems
> from a generation ago. Instead of the white segregationists of a
> generation ago, the most prominent Southern House members are now mostly
> African-American. . . .
This is what I disagree with most (relatively) in your post. The white Southern Dems are showing signs of coming back in non-racist garb. Blacks in the south are a significant electoral factor, but they can't swing states for the Dems. A statewide candidate or presidential candidate has to have something that appeals to some white folks. Jesse won Southern primaries with pluralities, if memory serves. that doesn't cut it in statewide, two-party contests.
I would venture the supposition that the position you and others advance is held by more people on this list than certain over-excited, putatively "marxist" ones. I raise this as a note of objection to LP's suggestion to Burford that he migrate to a list more conducive to his politics. Presumably, if all you wanted to listen to was LP and like-minded folks, you'd be on a marx list of one sort or another. If you're not, it must be because such participation doesn't float your boat. Which gets back to who is and is not "odd."
for the great silent majority, MBS