Democrats Seek the Middle on Social Issues

[DeepModem Mom]

NYT: Democrats Seek the Middle on Social Issues
By ROBIN TONER
Published: January 16, 2007


(Susan Walsh/Associated Press)
Representatives Nancy Pelosi of California, the House speaker, and James E. Clyburn of South Carolina have been open about their faith.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 15 — The promise may not outlast their political honeymoon, but Democratic Congressional leaders say they are committed to governing from the center, and not just on bread-and-butter issues like raising the minimum wage or increasing aid for education. They also hope to bring that philosophy to bear on some of the most divisive social issues in politics, like abortion....

***

The mantra, for many Democrats, is the search for common ground. On gay rights, lawmakers and advocates said the most likely legislation in the new Congress would focus on hate crimes and employment discrimination, issues expected to be much less polarizing than the debate over same-sex marriage that was front and center in the Republican Congress.

“I don’t think the American people get mad if you say a woman shouldn’t get fired from her job because she’s a lesbian,” said Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts....

***

...the Democrats’ moves toward consensus-building on issues that often resist consensus reflect their effort to adjust to a new political reality. Their majority is slimmer than it was the last time they were in power, especially in the Senate. The country, some pollsters say, has grown more conservative on abortion and other social issues.

And conservatives, by controlling which legislation came to the floor, succeeded in defining the debate over social issues for more than a decade, through votes on same-sex marriage and the procedure opponents call partial-birth abortion, in ways that highlighted the political limits of liberalism....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/16/us/politics/16dems.html?hp&ex=1169010000&en=800027f59e44b4bd&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Warren DeMontague]

1. Well, lets see. Number one, The MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE PRO CHOICE.

Number two, the "pro-life" agenda starts with criminalizing abortion, but it encompasses criminalizing all forms of birth control (except maybe "keep your legs crossed, missy") and quite probably most pro-life groups would like to see non-procreative sex in general made against the law. That's the plan-- Read how the SCOTUS decision they really are gunning for isn't so much Roe as it is Griswold. If you combine the language of the HLA plank of the Republican National Platform with what the major "pro-life" groups say about the pill, it's clear that they seek to have oral contraceptives outlawed, if not to outright charge any women who take them with murder.

That's where they sit on the spectrum.

So where does this "middle" lie? More funding for research into contraception? More availability for contraception? Perhaps forcing insurance plans to cover contraception and getting prenatal care for every american woman, regardless of insurance status?

One might think so. Unfortunately, the "pro life" gang is just as anti contraception as they are allegedly anti abortion. It's not about preventing abortion, it's about stopping all the unauthorized fucking.

Alas, this is more of the same "courting the values voters" bullshit that we keep hearing about, with the inevitable calls to ditch the pro-choicers, the women, the gays, the atheists, etc. Unfortunately, whoever in our party thinks this is the way to win (Cough. The DLC. Cough) has been listening to a pack of lies about where the votes are. The American People are far more socially libertarian than the Corporate Media "Conventional Wisdom" wants to let on. This is why Terri Schiavo bit the GOP in the ass.

To me, a reasonable "middle ground" position is, "If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one- and in the meantime, we're going to increase funding for contraceptive research, insist upon REALITY BASED sex ed in schools WITH contraceptive availability, we're going to insist that health plans cover contraception, and we'd also like the Birth Control Pill to be available OTC, so Jesus-Drunk Pharmacists cant hold womens' prescriptions hostage".

THAT'S a middle of the road, reasonable position IMHO.

[IndianaGreen]

2. There was no "middle ground" on segregation or apartheid

This DLC bullshit of "middle ground" on LGBT and reproductive rights is something one would expect from a moderate Republican, not a Democrat. The same can be said about the war in Iraq.

If the Democrats want to keep Congress, they better don't fuck over the very people that got them elected.

[Warren DeMontague]

4. Here's the middle ground: Don't like Gay Marriage? Don't have one.

Don't like abortion? Don't have one...

...But even better, we'll let you work to reduce the numbers of surgical abortions in this country by making sure that everyone who wants access to birth control has it, everyone has MORE choices in birth control than they do now, public schools teach sex ed WITH information AND availability of contraception, etc. etc. Throw in a Single Payer Health Care System and a liveable minimum wage so being a poor single woman facing an unplanned pregnancy in this country wouldn't be such a cruel joke. Hows about them apples?

[Chulanowa]

8. BINGO!

There is no "center" stance on civil rights. You are either for, or you are against. Anything less than full acceptance of those rights constitutes an "against" vote.

Dammit. We need a bunch of people to go to DC with bullhorns to remind teh Democrats, "YOU HAVE THE MAJORITY, MORONS! USE IT!" Being bipartisan is not a good thing when the other party are a bunch of white supremacist wife-beating sociopaths.

[monarch]

3. Now is not the time to back away from the core values

that have always sustained our party. People will see it not as seeking common ground but as clawing our way back to power no matter the cost to our self respect. Look at what happened with IWR. I'm convinced that most Dems (and some pubs) knew it was the wrong thing to do but that voting for it was the correct choice for a politician who was concerned with his own career. I also do not think that the country is becoming more conservative. Look at the views of our young people. They accept ideas such as gay marriage.

What we need to do is stand up for what we know is right and get the damned right wing churches out of politics.

[katsy]

5. Let me get this straight...

People are drowning in debt, uninsured, jobs being outsourced, using 70% of their credit line on living expenses, have been lied to by the chimp about Iraq, troops murdered daily, crime is up BUT we want the Democratic leadership to move to the center on issues like Gay marriage and abortion.

Uh - FUCK NO WE DON'T! Pro-choice and Gay rights are part of the Democratic agenda and we don't need your stinking watering down of our core values.

And Barney... we don't want free trade, we want fair trade and no deals. Get the corporations out of the people's government okay Barney?

Get out of our panties you voyeurs, stop dividing the people with wedge issues and get to work on what we elected you to do.

[neoblues]

7. I second your remarks! nt.

[elocs]

6. The question is, are most Americans in the middle on social issues?

The Democrats who actually serve in Congress have to deal with the political reality that does exist. Taking a liberal stance on social issues when most Americans are more conservative is a shortcut to losing power. I would rather see the Democrats remain in power even if they are only nudging the country toward a more liberal social issue stance and do what they are able rather than see the Republicans back in power and moving it hard to the right. Plus, when you don't build a consensus in Congress it will be hard to get any bills passed when you do not have a veto proof majority. You cannot always get everything you want and exactly what you want.