Today is the day to take action on H.R. 5740.  As I outlined on Friday:

It's time to draw a line in the sand. There are forty-seven members of the Blue Dog Democrats, and we need to know which ones support the U.S. troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and which ones agree with Rep. John Tanner that they are nothing more than deficit-enhancing debris. This is what Mr. Tanner had to say when announcing the plan by a segment of the Blue Dogs to block a vote on the GI Bill of Rights:

Some of us oppose creating a new entitlement program in an emergency spending bill, whether it’s butchers, bakers or candlestick-makers.

A group that has voted time after time to support George Bush's war, at a cost of over $500 billion dollars, now dismisses the men and women who risked their lives as candlestick-makers who don't deserve money to go to college? The Blue Dog's reason? Because their budgetary rule of pay-as-you-go has "been ignored one too many times." Yes, these champions of fiscal responsibility are fine with George Bush's twice-a-year $100 billion "supplementals," they are fine with billions going to Halliburton and Blackwater, but when it comes to providing a benefit to the people who fought in the war that the Blue Dogs supported, well, to hell with the troops.

This week House Democratic leaders will once again to try bring the Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008 up for a vote and we need to know which Blue Dogs plan to join John "candlestick-maker" Tanner in blocking educational benefits for the men and women who served in Iraq and Afghanistan.  

Bear in mind, the only reason to block this vote is because they are too cowardly to stand up and publicly oppose this bill.  If they don't want to support the troops, they should have the guts to come out and say so instead of trying to hide behind a procedural maneuver.  

So please, take a few minutes to call a Blue Dog and ask if they intend to block H.R. 5740 or if they will support educational assistance for veterans.  And tell them that supporting the troops isn't just a slogan...at least it shouldn't be.

And for more action items, go to Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA).

Mike Arcuri (NY): (202) 225-3665
Joe Baca  (CA): (202) 225-6161
John Barrow  (GA): (202) 225-2823
Melissa Bean  (IL): (202) 225-3711
Marion Berry  (AR): (202) 225-4076
Sanford Bishop  (GA): (202) 225-3631
Dan Boren  (OK): (202) 225-2701
Leonard Boswell  (IA): (202) 225-3806
Allen Boyd  (FL): (202) 225-5235
Dennis Cardoza  (CA): (202) 225-6131
Christopher Carney  (PA): (202) 225-3731
Ben Chandler  (KY): (202) 225-4706
Jim Cooper  (TN): (202) 225-4311
Jim Costa  (CA): (202) 225-3341
Bud Cramer (AL): (202) 225-4801
Lincoln Davis  (TN): (202) 225-6831
Joe Donnelly  (IN): (202) 225-3915
Brad Ellsworth  (IN): (202) 225-4636
Gabrille Giffords  (AZ): (202) 225-2542
Kirsten Gillibrand  (NY): (202) 225-5614
Bart Gordon  (TN): (202) 225-4231
Jane Harman  (CA): (202) 225 8220
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin  (SD): (202) 225-2801
Baron Hill  (IN): (202) 225-5315
Tim Holden  (PA): (202) 225-5546
Steve Israel  (NY): (202)  225 3335
Nick Lampson  (TX): (202) 225-5951
Tim Mahoney  (FL): (202) 225-5792
Jim Marshall  (GA): (202) 225-6531
Jim Matheson  (UT): (202) 225-3011
Mike McIntyre  (NC): (202) 225-2731
Charlie Melancon  (LA): (202) 225-4031
Michael Michaud  (ME): (202) 225-6306
Dennis Moore  (KS): (202) 225-2865
Patrick Murphy  (PA): (202) 225-4276
Collin Peterson  (MN): (202) 225-2165
Earl Pomeroy  (ND): (202) 225-2611
Mike Ross  (AR): 1-800-223-2220
John Salazar  (CO): (202) 225-4761
Loretta Sanchez  (CA): (202) 225-2965
Adam Schiff  (CA): (202) 225-4176
David Scott  (GA): (202) 225-2939
Heath Shuler  (NC): (202) 225-6401
Zack Space  (OH): (202) 225-6265
John Tanner  (TN): (202) 225-4714
Gene Taylor  (MS): (202) 225-5772
Mike Thompson  (CA): (202) 225-3311
Charlie Wilson  (OH): (202) 225-5705

It's time to draw a line in the sand.  There are forty-seven members of the Blue Dog Democrats, and we need to know which ones support the U.S. troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan and which ones agree with Rep. John Tanner that they are nothing more than deficit-enhancing debris. This is what Mr. Tanner had to say when announcing the plan by a segment of the Blue Dogs to block a vote on the GI Bill of Rights:

Some of us oppose creating a new entitlement program in an emergency spending bill, whether it’s butchers, bakers or candlestick-makers.

A group that has voted time after time to support George Bush's war, at a cost of over $500 billion dollars, now dismisses the men and women who risked their lives as candlestick-makers who don't deserve money to go to college?  The Blue Dog's reason?  Because their budgetary rule of pay-as-you-go has "been ignored one too many times."  Yes, these champions of fiscal responsibility are fine with George Bush's twice-a-year $100 billion "supplementals," they are fine with billions going to Halliburton and Blackwater, but when it comes to providing a benefit to the people who fought in the war that the Blue Dogs supported, well, to hell with the troops.  

The Blue Dogs only need 15 votes to block a vote on this measure which scheduled to come up next week, and when asked if they had enough members opposing the bill, Blue Dog leader Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL) said:

"There’s 47 of us, what do you think?"

I think that out of the 292 co-sponsors of the bill , 36 are Blue Dog Democrats, which means one of two things:  either Tanner and Boyd plan to join forces with Republicans to kill this bill, or there are at least 4 Blue Dogs who don't have the courage to stand by their convictions and do the right thing.  
It's time to find out where the Blue Dogs stand.  Do they stand with the troops or do they stand with George Bush, John McCain and the Blue Dogs who dismiss the troops as "candlestick-makers" who don't deserve benefits when they return from war?   Call and ask if they intend to help block H.R. 5740.

Mike Arcuri:  (202) 225-3665
Joe Baca:  (202) 225-6161
John Barrow:  (202) 225-2823
Melissa Bean:  (202) 225-3711
Marion Berry: (202) 225-4076
Sanford Bishop:  (202) 225-3631
Dan Boren:  (202) 225-2701
Leonard Boswell:  (202) 225-3806
Allen Boyd:  (202) 225-5235
Dennis Cardoza:  (202) 225-6131
Christopher Carney:  (202) 225-3731
Ben Chandler:  (202) 225-4706
Jim Cooper:  (202) 225-4311
Jim Costa:  (202) 225-3341
Bud Cramer:  (202) 225-4801
Lincoln Davis:  (202) 225-6831
Joe Donnelly:  (202) 225-3915
Brad Ellsworth:  (202) 225-4636
Gabrille Giffords:  (202) 225-2542
Kirsten Gillibrand:  (202) 225-5614
Bart Gordon:  (202) 225-4231
Jane Harman:  (202) 225 8220
Stephanie Herseth Sandlin:  (202) 225-2801
Baron Hill:  (202) 225-5315
Tim Holden:  (202) 225-5546
Steve Israel:  (202) 225-4669
Nick Lampson:  (202) 225-5951
Tim Mahoney:  (202) 225-5792
Jim Marshal:  (202) 225-6531
Jim Matheson:  (202) 225-3011
Mike McIntyre:  (202) 225-2731
Charlie Melancon:  (202) 225-4031
Michael Michaud:  (202) 225-6306
Dennis Moore:  (202) 225-2865
Patrick Murphy:  (202) 225-4276
Collin Peterson:  (202) 225-2165
Earl Pomeroy:  (202) 225-2611
Mike Ross:   1-800-223-2220
John Salazar:   (202) 225-4761
Loretta Sanchez:  (202) 225-2965
Adam Schiff:  (202) 225-4176
David Scott:  (202) 225-2939
Heath Shuler:  (202) 225-6401
Zack Space:  (202) 225-6265
John Tanner:  (202) 225-4714
Gene Taylor: (202) 225-5772
Mike Thompson:  (202) 225-3311
Charlie Wilson:  (202) 225-5705

Self-identified Bluedog coalition, from a letter on today's, September 12, 2007, Wall Street Journal editorial page.

This is not my favorite type of post.  I much prefer going after Republicans, but when I see something like this happen, I can't let it slip by.  Friday night at the Collins-Steele Dinner in Tallahassee Congressman Allen Boyd gave a speech in which he referred to Barack Obama as "smart" and "articulate."  That was the whole of his description.  Here we go again...

There is considerable wailing and gnashing of teeth here today about the obvious fact that the Cong Dems are basically retreating across the board on Iraq.  The Murtha plan died in the House Dem Caucus, and the Conrad plan died in the Senate Dem Caucus.  The sad reality is, unfortunately, that there is some difficult political arithmetic ruthlessly at work here.

Pelosi has a tenuous hold over the House.  Although she enjoys a numerical majority that is larger than any that either Gingrich or Hastert ever enjoyed, her working majority is very narrow.  There are 44 Blue Dogs in the House.  If the Goopers hold their caucus in check, Pelosi loses her majority on a given issue if a little over 1/3 of the Blue Dogs leave the ranch.

In true full Broderism, the likes of Reps. Allen Boyd, Dennis Moore, and Mike Ross are trumpeting their moderating influences on the Democratic party in today's Roll Call [subscription]. Here's a choice bit from Boyd:

"Let's face it, we all know that both parties, in large part, are controlled by extremes that in some cases are different from what we might represent in the middle," Boyd said. "We don't think the Speaker's philosophy or her particular district's philosophy is important. What we think is important is the management style she uses. How she is inclusive with us, how she acts."

We all know that Nancy Pelosi is an extremist? Only Allen Boyd and his band of 44 Blue Dogs represent the middle? The remaining 190 Dems are a bunch of far-left whacked out extremists? Yes, Allen Boyd, because you have such a positive attitude toward your party and because you are so helpful to the Democratic cause, by all means, Speaker Pelosi should include you. Just think about what you did for us on Social Security. You were so absolutely helpful on that one, being the only Democrat to support Bush's Social Security privatization plan. What a triumph of moderation and bipartisanship that one was.

In all seriousness, the arrogance with which Allen and his merry band of Blue Dog Dems are approaching their role in the party is an obvious problem for leadership. Consider this:

On a recent weekday afternoon, leaders of the moderate group gathered in the office of Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), the coalition's communications chairman, to discuss their place in the new majority, as well as their aims for the 110th Congress. In addition to Ross and Moore, the group included Democratic Reps. Allen Boyd (Fla.), the group's administration chairman, Stephanie Herseth (S.D.), the group's whip, and John Tanner (Tenn.), a co-founder of the Blue Dogs and a current co-chairman of its political action committee.

"I think one of the things that's different now, I think there was a time when Blue Dogs were looked at by some Democrats as though perhaps they weren't really Democrats and I think that's no longer the case," Ross said.

"I think people are recognizing that not only do we represent the middle, which is where we believe the American people are and certainly where we are, I think people within our own Caucus now recognize that we have created the majority and that we have done some pretty heavy lifting as a group to ensure that Democrats did regain a majority...."

In addition, Boyd asserted that Democratic leadership has "been very inclusive when it comes to the committee assignments. They have been very inclusive when it comes to consulting us on legislation. We meet with them on a regular basis."

Did we become a parliamentary government while America wasn't looking? Do we now have a coalition government in which this splinter group of Democrats, a minority of the voting bloc, can work against the will of the majority to gum up the works?

But wait, it gets better:

"We think this is the group that represents where the greatest bloc of Americans are — toward that big middle. Not far left, not far right, but that big middle, that's going to be able to get things done," he added. "And it's going to have to be done on a bipartisan basis."

Did they learn nothing from the previous 12 years in the wilderness? This is not a Republican party interested in bipartisanship. The Bush administration is not interested in working with any Democrats. The Republican party and the Bush administration is interested in using the Blue Dogs as a wedge in the Democratic majority. They are using the Blue Dogs to further nothing but the Republican cause.

The Blue Dog Dems are kidding themselves if they think they are on the vanguard of the new Democratic party--the Democrats didn't so much win in many of these districts as the Republicans lost, and the Republicans lost in large part because of the absolutely disastrous Iraq war. A war which the American people expect a new Democratic Congress to do its utmost to get us out of. And how do they repay that trust the American people have given them? They work actively to derail the Murtha plan, a plan which, btw, a majority of the American public supports!

The Blue Dogs have led the way on some important fiscal issues, taking the lead on pay-as-you-go funding limitations being passed in the first 100 hours. They should stick with the fiscal issues, those core issues for them. And stay the hell out of the Iraq debate if they can do nothing more than splinter the caucus.

Tuesday E-News Briefs From The Florida Democratic Party, 2/27/07

• Party Hosting Legislative Appreciation Reception on March 5
• Republican Push Back! Help Keep Tampa City Council Blue!
• Manatee DEC Annual Dinner and Dance Fundraiser Friday
• Thurman to Attend Hamilton (Thursday) and Citrus (Saturday) Dem Dinners
• Support Your State Party with a Florida Democratic Party MasterCard!
• Boyd Wins FSU Award, Hosts Ag Summit in Jefferson County
• Florida's Putnam Named 'Worst Person in the World'
• Congratulations, Al Gore!
• Tell a Friend!