WASHINGTON (By
Greg Simmons, Fox News) December 5, 2006 —
Now that the results of the midterm election have demonstrated
the strength of moderate to conservative Democrats in swing
districts, the clout of the independently minded Blue Dog
Coalition is on the rise, say political observers, and its bite
could match its bark.
"They can cause fits for the
majority leadership," said Brookings Institution scholar Ron
Haskins. Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi "is going to have a lot of
trouble holding that coalition together."
Democrats will hold 232 seats
in Congress come January; Republicans will have 200, and three
races are still undecided but looking to go to the GOP. With 218
votes needed to pass legislation, and 44 incoming Blue Dogs next
Congress, according to the group, a strong voting bloc could
make or break Democratic-sponsored legislation.
Haskins, a former Republican
staff director for the House Ways and Means Committee
subcommittee on human resources and former senior adviser for
welfare policy for President Bush, said the Blue Dogs have the
potential to derail Democratic plans that don't stand on solid
bipartisan ground.
Democrats "can't hold their
majority without them," he said.
"I think in the upcoming
Congress the center is going to be a good place to be," said
Massie Ritsch, spokesman for the Center for Responsive Politics.
"And with the ... balance of power as tight as it is — in the
Senate certainly, and still decently in the House — those who
play in the middle may be heavily courted because they can have
great influence over votes, and therefore, legislation."
Blue Dogs — those who have been
"choked blue" by demands for party unity — hail from all over
the geographic map. They come from 24 states reaching both
coasts and represent districts in some of the bluest states like
New York and California as well as red strongholds in the
Southeast and Midwest: Alabama, Arkansas, Ohio, Kansas, Kentucky
and Tennessee, to name a few.
Their existence dates back to
1995, when Democratic moderates decided the party needed "a
common sense, bridge-building voice" to negotiate with the
conservative majority swept in to office during the 1994
Republican Revolution. Their primary objective is to be
"middle-ground markers" who can lay the foundation "for the
bipartisanship necessary to bring about fundamental reforms."
"The Blue Dogs basically came
into being because of what they consider to be a lack of
accountability in the Congress to the American taxpayers, with
respect to the oversight, constitutional duties that Congress
has," said Rep. John Tanner, one of the group's longest-serving
members.
"The problem has gotten worse
in the last four or five years. ... Now we have a chance to
bring some business principles back to the government," said
Tanner, who will begin his 10th term in Congress in January.
If Tanner is representative of
the coalition, Blue Dogs are anything but knee-jerk votes in the
Legislature. The Tennessean parted from his party's majority on
the Estate Tax and Extension of Relief Act, which would have
raised the minimum value of an inheritance that can be subject
to the estate tax to $5 million from $3.75 million by 2015, and
reduced the size of the tax. The bill died in the Senate.
Tanner also voted to back a
military commissions bill that President Bush signed into law to
set up a formal way to prosecute the terror suspects held at
Guantanamo Bay. A former JAG officer, Tanner said that while he
did have some concerns over innocent people getting caught in
the bureaucracy, overall, he believes the military courts offer
a fair system of justice, and in some cases, are better than
civilian courts.
On immigration, Tanner
supported the House's Republican-sponsored get-tough bill last
December. He said he didn't cast the vote as a repudiation of
the more moderate "comprehensive immigration" plans being
offered by President Bush and a Senate bipartisan group. Rather,
he voted "just to get something on the table."
"You got to start somewhere,"
he said, noting that it's nearly impossible to arrest and deport
the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants living
in the United States.
Some of the upcoming issues
confronting the 110th Congress provide big opportunities for
Blue Dogs to seize. Ethics and accountability, for instance, are
a high priority for the group that is likely to be addressed
next session.
"When we were in the minority,
it didn't matter much what our position was. ... But now I think
we'll have more to say about it," said Tanner, who is offering a
proposal to require government agencies either to produce
financial audits or face congressional hearings with the
possibility of losing their funding if they can't account for
their spending.
Accountability is critical for
a group whose own fundraising organization is considered one of
the Democrats' strongest. With 280 active fundraising groups
affiliated with Democrats or liberal groups in the 2006 cycle,
the Blue Dogs were one of only 20 that raised more than $1
million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
"They are among the most active
Democratic PACs out there," Ritsch said.
The group's fundraising arm,
Blue Dog PAC, took in $1.1 million through the latest reporting
period in the last cycle and they distributed $425,000 directly
to federal candidates, with the rest going to other political
organizations and consultants.
The political action
committee's fundraising pattern continues to strengthen too. The
PAC raised $261,597 in the cycle that ended in 1998. That number
will have quadrupled at least for the 2006 cycle once all the
paperwork is complete.
"They're raising more and more
money, which can suggest both [that] they're being courted more
and more, and they're growing their influence among fellow
members by giving more money to them," Ritsch said.
The coalition has already
scored one political victory. House Democrats have adopted a
pay-as-you-go statement as part of their core goals for the
110th Congress, something that has been a perennial Blue Dog
issue. According to the House Democrats' statement, no new tax
cut or spending increase will add to the federal deficit.
The Blue Dogs' first public
battle since the elections also demonstrated their strength,
throwing their support to Rep. Jane Harman of California to
become chairwoman of the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence. Nineteen Blue Dogs sent a letter to Pelosi in
support of their fellow Blue Dog over Georgia Rep. Alcee
Hastings.
Pelosi did not choose Harman,
but she also passed over Hastings, and instead chose a former
Border Patrol agent, Texas Rep. Silvestre Reyes as the panel's
chairman.
Haskins said he'll be watching
the budget process to see how well Democrats play with each
other. Congress will be looking to adopt a budget resolution in
the spring that will lay out the plan for addressing the
president's budget requests. A trimmer deficit would be a clue
that Blue Dogs might be having their day. He said other
big-budget items like education and welfare programs also will
be ones to watch.
Current Blue Dog Coalition
Co-Chairman Jim Matheson, D-Utah, has been quoted saying his
group plans on working together with a group of moderate
Republicans on pro-growth legislation. The next Blue Dog team
will be led by Reps. Allen Boyd of Florida, Dennis Moore of
Kansas, Mike Ross of Arkansas and Stephanie Herseth of South
Dakota.
Haskins said on the budget and
other economic issues, cooperation between the Blue Dogs and
Republicans is "the kind of situation ... most dangerous for the
Democratic leadership." He said Republicans are generally more
unified and need fewer Democrats to defect to support their
positions.
"It's a very simple concept.
[Blue Dogs] are centrist. They don't necessarily agree with the
far left. They don't necessarily agree with lots of new taxes,"
Haskins said.