A DEMOCRATIC ATTEMPT AT A POLITICAL PLATFORM http://web.newsguy.com/politicaleconomy/Democratic_100_Hours.html
INTRODUCTION:
My understanding is that voters rarely pay much attention to political promises. They are more likely to vote for or against an incumbents previous record, than for or against the the promises of an individual candidate.
One of the reasons for this is that we don't have national parties that enforce party platforms. Even if a candidate makes a clear promise, one Senator or Representative cannot pass a law. Heck; one Senator or Representative can't even get a bill out of committee and force a vote on the issue!
This political reality leads groups of politicians or individual political leaders, such as the leader of the U.S. House, to try and make believable promises. I call them imitation party platforms. The Contract with America, prior the the 1994 elections, is a Republican example.
My question is - will the Democrats attempt something similar to the 2006 election's "100 Hour Plan?"
-------------------
THE DEMOCRAT'S 100 HOURS PLAN http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100-Hour_Plan
The plan was promised by Democrats in the days leading up to the 2006 midterm elections in the United States, in which the Democratic Party won control of both houses of Congress (in the House by a margin of 233-202 and in the Senate by a margin of 51-49--both independent Senators caucus with the 49 Democrats) after twelve years of Republican control.
The 100-Hour Plan was a United States Democratic Party political strategy detailing the actions the party pursued upon assuming leadership of the 110th Congress on January 4, 2007. The strategy was announced before the 2006 midterm elections. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had pledged that her party would continue to pursue these goals upon her assumption of leadership. The 100-hour time period refers to business hours and not actual time, and has alternately been termed "100 legislative hours".
By January 18, 2007, 87 business hours after the swearing-in, the House of Representatives had passed every one of the plan's measures in the form that they had been submitted to Congress. These measures included all of those promised, with the exception of part of one of the recommendations of the 9/11 commission.
------------
A Few of the More Specific Promises -
Raise the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour, maybe in one step. Cut the interest rate on student loans in half. Allow the government to negotiate directly with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices for Medicare patients.
------------
MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCES
I didn't actually hear the phrase, "100 Hour Plan" until long after the 2006 election. However, I am subscribed to an AFL-CIO mailing list, and a few weeks before the 2006 midterm elections the message was passed down that a $ 7.25 minimum wage would be passed if the Democrats gained control of Congress. My memory is a bit hazy, but I remember the AFL-CIO email as stating something to the effect that either Howard Dean, or Nancy Pelosi guaranteed the result.
I spent some time thinking about it, but ultimately concluded that it was more Democratic party BS. Unless a deal had been made how could any Democratic political leader know that President Bush wouldn't veto such a bill? How could Howard Dean or Nancy Pelosi know that a minority of U.S. Senators wouldn't filibuster the bill, or for that matter have a handful of Senators put an indefinite hold on the bill using Senate privilege? Since U.S. Senators have weak party discipline there would also be some question of Senate Democratic unity on the issue. The House was more certain because party discipline is stronger, and prior to the 2006 election a large number of Republican house members had already voted with the Democrats for a minimum wage bill.
In retrospect it was not Democratic party BS. It was the exact opposite. If there were deals made I don't know what they were. Anyway; deals are the way almost anything gets done in politics. This is particularly true given the way the U.S. Senate has chosen to structure itself. I am particularly impressed with the way the AFL-CIO used the Internet and mailing lists to bypass the traditional media. The specific targeting, plus the closeness to the election, would probably have limited the scope of any counter attack. -----
SOURCE MATERIAL
Associated Press Article Pelosi Says She Would Drain GOP 'Swamp' By David Espo Friday, October 6, 2006; 1:58 AM http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/06/AR2006100600056.html
CONTRACT WITH AMERICA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America
------- Jack
In my view a true history of popular sovereignty in the U.S. would show an ever increasing franchise, along with a continued erosion of the power of that franchise To put it another way, the franchised citizenry has far less political power today than they would have had in say 1830.
My ( under construction ) web site - Political Power in the U.S.: and why you don't have any! http://tinyurl.com/2sdtvk