Calling Mr. Dean a canine sounds harsh. But he is not the only dog in the Democratic party. There are the Blue Dogs.
This group of centrists in the House of Representatives chose their name to play off the old phrase "Yellow Dogs", referring to Southern party loyalists, of whom it was said: "they would vote for a yellow dog if it was a Democrat". The Blue Dogs, by contrast, seek to define themselves as independent. They feel "strangled blue" as their own party jerks leftward and Republicans pull to the right. They are mostly white, mostly Christian and mostly male (what about that, Howard?). But they do have their own brand of diversity: diversity in voting pattern. Blue Dogs sometimes vote with their party and sometimes vote with Republicans. This habit has not endeared them to their leadership. But the public often likes it. Since 1996, "Blue Pup" candidates have captured 18 Republican congressional seats.
Over lunch last week in
Part of the blame, the Blue Dogs charge, lies with a careless Republican-led Congress. Members sometimes fail even to read the legislation they approve. This summer Congress is working on two obscenely expensive projects, a transportation and an energy bill. Nearly every Republican on Capitol Hill must acknowledge wasteful expenditure. One egregious example has been Republican Finance Committee chairman Charles Grassley's rainforest park -- in
Blue Dogs allege that President George W. Bush too is also at fault. He is failing to block the path to the trough. Former presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush vetoed legislation they did not like. This Mr. Bush has not. Nor does he kill wasteful projects the way Mr. Clinton did. Because Republicans also control both legislative chambers, no countervailing force slows their spending. The war on terror makes political opposition feel unpatriotic. Like wartime presidents before him Mr. Bush uses war to justify spending that would otherwise be challenged.
The Blue Dogs warn of danger ahead. Future obligations will convert deficits into debt. The federal debt will double this decade. Congress, they say, must restrain spending, punish agencies that flunk their audits, cut back Medicare and order collection of uncollected taxes. If
There are flaws in the Blue Dog position. The first is the reality that, given control of both houses and the executive, the Democrats would outspend even the piggiest Republican Congress. The second is that the White House is not as greedy as the Blue Dogs suggest. Mr. Bush has fought to kill, reduce or reform more than 150 government programs. The White House has asked Congress to cut non-defense, non-homeland security spending in the 2006 budget.
Another problem is the Blue Dog preoccupation with deficits rather than growth. They note that the
Finally there is Social Security. Reforming the national pension plan is the single most obvious thing that can help to improve
Still, next to the other Democratic type Mr. Dean -- the Blue Dogs have appeal. The White House can learn from them. Unlike the 1990s, this period is one with problems that are much harder to "grow out of" so growth alone is not the answer to structural problems. Also important, however, is that the Democratic party focus on these studious centrists. The Blue Dogs can rescue their party and it would be unwise to discount them. Every dog has his day.
The author is Senior Columnist with the Financial Times
* Last week I misquoted Paul Rosenstein-Rodan in regard to development economics. What he said was: "When the World Bank thinks it is financing an electric power station, it is really financing a brothel."
