Nathan Newman wrote: -What evidence do you have that the average Democratic elected leader is -more rightwing than a generation ago?
>I'm not sure who the "average Democratic leader" is. I do know that the
>Dems did nothing to raise the min wage when they controlled Congress
>in the early Clinton years. Etc. If you mean that Southern troglodytes
>are now Reps rather than Dems, ok. But otherwise, there's no question
>that the national party has moved to the right, and you'd be a lot more
>credible if you could concede that. It's not just the DP's doing, for sure
>- the right has moved madly to the right, and capital has been far more
>assertive since the mid-1970s.
>Let's look at some past party platforms.
>1972
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/site/docs/doc_platforms.php?platindex=D1972
I actually don't see that much in the platforms, in substance as opposed to rhetoric, that are so different. Platforms are deceptive, since they reflect promises, not voting records, which I think are far more important.
Seriously, compare McGovern's tax plans to Kerry's. McGovern didn't even talk about raising taxes on the wealthy (unlike Kerry who plans steep tax increases on them). All McGovern talked about was closing loopholes, not unimportant, but not as dramatic as Kerry. Kerry is promising an array of benefits to families, including the poor, that would make a tremendous difference:
* A tax credit on up to $4,000 of college tuition (all of it available even if a family pays no income taxes * A tax credit on $5,000 of child care expenses (and $1500 would be available even if you pay no income taxes) * Making the present child credit fully refundable
On any domestic policy issue, what did even McGovern promise that is significantly better in its details than what Kerry is proposing? See http://www.4president.org/brochures/mcgovern72.pdf for some more concrete proposals from McGovern.
On health care, McGovern talked about a plan to provide health care "at a cost every American can afford", not exactly a more dramatic promise on health care than Kerry.
McGovern's jobs program was more interesting than Kerry's job plan, which depends on a range of tax credits to businesses to hire new employees, but there is still a broad commitment to expanding jobs. And stepping away from promises, the Dems controlled the Congress throughout the 60s and 70s and never implemented a full employment jobs program, so it's hard to see any big backsliding in the party from the 1970s to today on that score.
And that was of course McGovern. The average Democrat back then, yes, included a lot more Dixiecrats and rightwingers, so the median Democrat today in Congress is far more progressive than the median Democrat back then.
I also find it odd to say that it's not the party's doing that they've moved to the right, since capital has been more assertive. If a group's options have changed but they have the same values, I don't think it's a rightward shift to take changed options into account in making proposals.
And I repeat, on social issues like abortion, gay rights, and a range of other issues, the Democrats are unquestionably more liberal than in 1972. Note that the words "abortion" and "gay" don't even appear in the 1972 platform, but abortion rights and gay rights are fully defended in Kerry's platform.
Here's the real challenge. Point to a bill passed by the Democratically-controlled Congress in the 1970s that the Democrats would NOT pass today if they had a majority again.
Nathan Newman