Adult Political Discussion

[extelecom]

Democrats' Factions Could Stall Grand Plans
By NAFTALI BENDAVID and GREG HITT

WASHINGTON -- The new Congress sweeps into town Tuesday with many members comparing themselves to the 1933 Congress that enacted much of President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal and changed the government's relationship to its citizenry.
These times are very different from 1933, when the 73rd Congress enacted 16 major laws during Mr. Roosevelt's First 100 Days. Today's economy, for all its struggles, doesn't remotely resemble the turmoil of the Great Depression, with its 25% unemployment. Also, the public's appetite for broad change isn't yet clear.

None of this is deterring the Democrats. Like the Congress of 76 years ago, they are converging on Washington with a popular new president, significant congressional majorities and, perhaps most important, a shaken public eager for government to try something new.

"We are at a unique moment in history -- we have an opportunity that maybe comes only once in a generation," Rep. Henry Waxman said recently. "We may well turn out to be as historical as the Congress was in 1933."

Democrats see the best chance in decades to expand health coverage, move toward energy independence, tackle climate change and re-regulate the financial-services industry.

"We certainly have the obligation to attack big problems," says Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, sitting under a large photo of Mr. Roosevelt in his personal office. "We have been playing small-ball for a long time here."The first order of business on the Democrats' agenda will be acting on a two-year economic-stimulus package. Still under construction, the plan could be as large as $775 billion, and it could include about $300 billion in tax cuts, $350 billion in infrastructure spending and billions more in aid to states and other measures. Democratic leaders hope to have the bill on President-elect Barack Obama's desk by mid-February.

Underlying the recovery plan and the Democrats' other agenda items is a determination to shift the nation's economic balance of power back to workers and the middle class -- by making it easier for employees to unionize, pushing banks to restructure mortgages and rewrite credit rules, and providing health coverage to more people.

What's to stop the Democrats? There are serious obstacles, starting with the party itself, which is hardly unified. Some Democratic congressional factions, like the more-conservative Blue Dogs, are deeply suspicious of expanded federal spending. Democrats from old industrial states worry that colleagues from California want to be too hard on the auto industry. Coal-state Democrats fear the party's environmental wing will go too far with efforts to clamp down on fossil fuels.Republicans, meanwhile, have made it clear they won't simply accept whatever Democrats propose, unlike in Mr. Roosevelt's day. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, joined by House Minority Leader John Boehner, recently issued a statement demanding "the consideration of alternative ideas, public congressional hearings and transparency -- not a rushed, partisan take-it-or-leave-it approach."

Some of what Congress wants to do may be obstructed by what it has to do. It must finish up the 2009 budget and debate the 2010 budget. When the Treasury Department seeks to release the second half of the $700 billion pool created to calm financial markets, Congress must debate whether to block the move or substantially revamp the program.

House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank said Congress would likely block the expenditure if brought up now. But Rep. Frank is studying "ways to make it more palatable," such as legislation to ensure the money is used to help with consumer needs such as student loans, auto purchases and mortgage relief.

The most important factor in the Democrats' success will likely be whether the party's actions reflect the "change" voters had in mind when they voted Republicans out of power.

Today, the public appears hungry for government action, but also wary. Nearly two-thirds of Americans support new spending to stimulate the economy, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found. At the same time, in a Wall Street Journal-NBC News poll, 56% worried the government would spend too much.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer sees a widespread desire to confront big problems after the Bush years.

"People see that we have sort of been dithering while Rome has been burning, and we need to respond," Rep. Hoyer, of Maryland, said in an interview.

But even if Democrats get virtually everything they want in the new Congress, it wouldn't amount to a "new New Deal." Instead, historians say the Democrats are really looking to revive and extend the fundamental approach behind Mr. Roosevelt's program, much as President Lyndon Johnson did in 1965 with programs like Medicare and Head Start.

"What the Democrats are looking to is really the spirit of the New Deal," said David Woolner, a history professor at Marist College and executive director of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute. "It's the idea that government can play a role in engineering a socio-economic system that provides great security for everyday Americans."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123120199307655729.html

This Dems. themselves may be the downfall of Obama as many have spent the last 8 years doing nothing but fighting againstr evrything that came along and adding pork to the little that got through... It also appears that the Obama admin seems to have too many people who think they are in charge (Pelosi, Frank, Reid). Will be interesting to see how Obama confronts them