The Democratic Contract w/ America.

[Moooooo]

Stumbled over this website called "ModerateVoters.org".  Anyway the have a Democratic Contract w/ America.

# “Crack Down on Corruption: In contrast to conservative cronyism, shut the revolving door between corporate lobbies and high office. Prohibit legislators, their senior aides and executive branch political appointees from lobbying for two years after leaving office. Require detailed public reporting of all contacts between lobbyists and legislators. Pledge to apply this to all, regardless of party. Take the big money out of politics by pushing for clean elections legislation.”

# “Make America Safe: Commit to an independent investigation of the Department of Homeland Security's failures in response to Katrina. Detail action on the urgent needs that this Administration has ignored: Improve port security, bolster first responders and public health capacity, and require adequate defense planning by high-risk chemical plants. End the pork-barrel squandering of security funds.”

# “Unleash New Energy for America: In contrast to the Big Oil policies of the Administration that leave us more dependent on foreign supplies, pledge to launch a concerted drive for energy independence like the one called for by the Apollo Alliance. Create new jobs by investing in efficiency and alternative energy sources, helping America capture the growing green industries of the future.”

# “Rebuild America First: Rescind Bush's tax cuts for the rich and corporations, which create more jobs in China than here, and use that money to put people to work building the infrastructure vital to a high-wage economy. Start with challenging the Administration's trickle-down plans for the Gulf Coast, which will victimize once more those who suffered the most.”

# “Make Work Pay: In contrast to the Bush economy, in which profits and CEO salaries soar while workers' wages stagnate and jobs grow insecure, put government on the side of workers. Raise the minimum wage. Empower workers to join unions by allowing card-check enrollment. Pay the prevailing wage in government contracts. Stop subsidizing the export of jobs abroad.”

# “Make Healthcare Affordable for All: Pledge to fix America's broken healthcare system, with the goal of moving to universal, affordable healthcare by 2015. Start by reversing the Republican sellout to the pharmaceutical industry by empowering Medicare to bargain down costs and by allowing people to purchase drugs from safe outlets abroad.”

# “Protect Retirement Security: In contrast to Bush's plan to dismantle Social Security, pledge to strengthen it and to require companies to treat the shop floor like the top floor when it comes to pensions and healthcare.”

# “Keep the Promise of Opportunity: Instead of Republican plans to cut eligibility for college grants and to limit loans, offer a contract to American students: If they graduate from high school, they will be able to afford the college or higher technical training they have earned. Pay for this by preserving the tax on the wealthiest multimillion-dollar estates in America.”

# “Refocus on Real Security for America: In contrast with Bush's pledge to stay in Iraq indefinitely, sapping our military and breeding terrorists, put forth a firm timeline for removing the troops from Iraq. Use the money saved to invest in security at home. Lead an aggressive international alliance to track down stateless terrorists, to get loose nukes under control and to fight nuclear proliferation.”

[AuH2O]

Well, if the Democratic Party had a real plan, they would make some gains in 2006. They may do OK without them, but you can't win the House or Senate with politics as usual.

I saw Gingrich speak last week, the topic was 1994 and the various aspects of his career that built up to that, as well as what's happened after. Very good speaker, no surprise, but he made a lot of sense. He was in charge of the effort to take the House back from 1978 until it happened 16 years later. And that's with a good plan, though the Contract itself was particular to 1994.

His basic point was that the Contract was nothing fancy-- they picked some issues and took positions that were both conservative and very popular with the electorate. Welfare reform, fiscal responsibility, etc.-- but that's only the first part.

The whole plan was designed to be implemented in 100 days. And actually the vast majority of it was done even sooner-- but the Senate and Clinton dragged their feet for a while, so it wasn't until '96-'97 that the Contract had basically been completed.

In other words, "universal health care" is not a Contract-type issue. It's not popular enough and not feasible. General plattitudes also are not that great i.e. "make America safe." Well, duh, but HOW. In a couple sentences. That's what you need.

[Frodo]

Stumbled over this website called "ModerateVoters.org".  Anyway the have a Democratic Contract w/ America.

# “Crack Down on Corruption: In contrast to conservative cronyism, shut the revolving door between corporate lobbies and high office. Prohibit legislators, their senior aides and executive branch political appointees from lobbying for two years after leaving office. Require detailed public reporting of all contacts between lobbyists and legislators. Pledge to apply this to all, regardless of party. Take the big money out of politics by pushing for clean elections legislation.”

# “Make America Safe: Commit to an independent investigation of the Department of Homeland Security's failures in response to Katrina. Detail action on the urgent needs that this Administration has ignored: Improve port security, bolster first responders and public health capacity, and require adequate defense planning by high-risk chemical plants. End the pork-barrel squandering of security funds.”

# “Unleash New Energy for America: In contrast to the Big Oil policies of the Administration that leave us more dependent on foreign supplies, pledge to launch a concerted drive for energy independence like the one called for by the Apollo Alliance. Create new jobs by investing in efficiency and alternative energy sources, helping America capture the growing green industries of the future.”

# “Rebuild America First: Rescind Bush's tax cuts for the rich and corporations, which create more jobs in China than here, and use that money to put people to work building the infrastructure vital to a high-wage economy. Start with challenging the Administration's trickle-down plans for the Gulf Coast, which will victimize once more those who suffered the most.”

# “Make Work Pay: In contrast to the Bush economy, in which profits and CEO salaries soar while workers' wages stagnate and jobs grow insecure, put government on the side of workers. Raise the minimum wage. Empower workers to join unions by allowing card-check enrollment. Pay the prevailing wage in government contracts. Stop subsidizing the export of jobs abroad.”

# “Make Healthcare Affordable for All: Pledge to fix America's broken healthcare system, with the goal of moving to universal, affordable healthcare by 2015. Start by reversing the Republican sellout to the pharmaceutical industry by empowering Medicare to bargain down costs and by allowing people to purchase drugs from safe outlets abroad.”

# “Protect Retirement Security: In contrast to Bush's plan to dismantle Social Security, pledge to strengthen it and to require companies to treat the shop floor like the top floor when it comes to pensions and healthcare.”

# “Keep the Promise of Opportunity: Instead of Republican plans to cut eligibility for college grants and to limit loans, offer a contract to American students: If they graduate from high school, they will be able to afford the college or higher technical training they have earned. Pay for this by preserving the tax on the wealthiest multimillion-dollar estates in America.”

# “Refocus on Real Security for America: In contrast with Bush's pledge to stay in Iraq indefinitely, sapping our military and breeding terrorists, put forth a firm timeline for removing the troops from Iraq. Use the money saved to invest in security at home. Lead an aggressive international alliance to track down stateless terrorists, to get loose nukes under control and to fight nuclear proliferation.”

I agree with most of the planks in this proposed Contract, though I think they should strip out the sentence demanding that we set a timetable for leaving Iraq.  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.  Even if this war is unpopular does not mean that we should leap onto the antiwar bandwagon in a replay of the 1960s. 

Apart from that, everything else looks good and should be aggressively promoted and advertised in people's minds as being the agenda of the Democratic Party and what we stand for.     

[ATFFL]

This will not work like the original Contract.  The original Contract wasn't just rhetoric stating a list of vague notions and goals.  It was a list of actionable items and a promise to vote on tehm in 100 days.  No guarantee of passage either, just the promise to vote on them. 

This really amounts to a repackage of Kerry's "I would do everything different" line.  It worked so well the first time, too!

[RJ]

Hate to say it, but this "Contract With America" business sounds a little arrogant to me. Not many would disagree with what they're saying, but a contract doesn't mean much until its signed on the dotted line. Sounds like empty promises.

They may do OK without them, but you can't win the House or Senate with politics as usual.

I don't understand why. Politics and not facts won the White House last year.

[Blank Slate]

They may do OK without them, but you can't win the House or Senate with politics as usual.

I don't understand why. Politics and not facts won the White House last year.
[/quote]

That's a good one.  Maybe the Democrats should hire you as their point person?

DUCK!!!!!!! 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.

you

[Joe Republic]

  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.

Fuck you

Not content with constantly attacking Republicans, you turn on your own party members and help confirm it's status as the official minority party.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.

Fuck you

Not content with constantly attacking Republicans, you turn on your own party members and help confirm it's status as the official minority party.

Frodo is a warmonger. I oppose the Iraq war, and wish that the Democrats would be less spineless on the issue. Bush has horrible ratings on the issue. If we followed Frodo's advice, the Democratic party would implode. Frodo probably wants people like Senator Kerry to leave the party.

[Blank Slate]

  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.

Fuck you

Not content with constantly attacking Republicans, you turn on your own party members and help confirm it's status as the official minority party.

Frodo is a warmonger. I oppose the Iraq war, and wish that the Democrats would be less spineless on the issue. Bush has horrible ratings on the issue. If we followed Frodo's advice, the Democratic party would implode. Frodo probably wants people like Senator Kerry to leave the party.

I agree with you jfern.  The Democrats have to have more of a spine on opposing the Iraq war. 

This is a war that is increasing being revealed as one that Americans were lied into.

And next year, if the war has taken more American lives, doesn't seem to be an end to it, explodes into another country, which all seem like very much possibilities the way this current administration is handling things; then the Democrats not opposing it won't help them much. 

And I myself think that Kerry was much more tepid in his opposition to the Iraq war.

Also I wish people would wake up and smell the coffee, already:  That the last point in this Contract about ending and being opposed to the Iraq War definitely agrees with the 2nd point about keeping America safe.   Because increasingly well America is over fighting this war in Iraq, increasingly we are destabilizing that country plus causing more destabilization of the rest of that region of the world.  All independent studies of what is going on in Iraq are pointing increasingly to that we are creating more terriorist, by what we are doing right now and since 2003, and not less. 

[dazzleman]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Until I saw a major change in the party, I could never believe that this party would be better on national security than the Republicans, no matter how much George Bush and his team may have fumbled certain issues.

I actually do think the Democrats could contribute something constructive to the security debate if they could rein in their extreme left wing.

[Frodo]

  Peaceniks can join the Greens or some other third party instead of continually reinforcing the impression on most people that Democrats are somehow weak on national security.

Fuck you

Not content with constantly attacking Republicans, you turn on your own party members and help confirm it's status as the official minority party.

Frodo is a warmonger. I oppose the Iraq war, and wish that the Democrats would be less spineless on the issue. Bush has horrible ratings on the issue. If we followed Frodo's advice, the Democratic party would implode. Frodo probably wants people like Senator Kerry to leave the party.

I doubt you have any clear idea what my advice was, Jfraud.  I was talking about our need to re-establish our credibility on national security that was lost originally because the Democratic Party decided to align itself with the anti-war movement beginning in the later half of the Vietnam War.  It is not a coincidence that as long as the Republican Party was associated with its isolationist wing, it was almost never trusted to defend the interests of this republic throughout the first half of the Cold War.  With the exception of the presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower, and perhaps two brief spells in control of Congress shortly after the end of the Second World War, Republicans were almost permanently in the minority. 

And before you mention it, the Democratic Party's hold on the South was predicated not just in its decision to overlook Jim Crow, but also on the perception that it was strong on national security.  It is no secret that then as now southerners were strongly supportive of the military and sent many of their sons to serve in it.  The South was and is perhaps more strongly associated with the military than perhaps any other region in the country.  Once this perception began to break down from 1972 onwards as the Democratic Party associated itself with the antiwar movement (and with it, the counter-culture), it was the beginning of the end of the Democratic Party as a majority party as southerners defected to the Republican Party, first at the presidential level, then at the congressional level, and later the state level.  The South is a microcosm of what has befallen us at the national level.  From 1968 onwards through the duration of the remainder of the Cold War, Republicans for the most part controlled the White House.  It is no secret that as long as national security was not the preeminent issue guiding how voters voted, we were able to regain the White House.  Once it regained prominence, as we all saw in 2004, we paid dearly for our negligence on this issue.

What is the point of this history lesson, you ask?  The Democratic Party sought to make short-term gains by turning against the Vietnam War when it became unpopular, and by so doing shook people's confidence in its ability and willingness to defend the interests of this country against threats and dangers from abroad, and thereby lost more over the long-term.  Our weakness on national security is a direct legacy of the decision to align ourselves with the antiwar movement then.   Your advice on having the Democratic Party define itself by its opposition to the Iraq War simply because you regard it as being politically expedient at present to do so given its unpopularity now is short-sighted as well as foolish.  We are never going to dig ourselves out of minority status over the long-term if we cannot regain some semblance of credibility on national security.  If we define ourselves by our opposition to the Iraq War, the electorate will condemn us to continued minority status through the duration of the War on Terrorism because we will have reinforced the impression in people's minds -as I have said before- that we are weak and untrustworthy when it comes to our willingness to defend this country from threats abroad.         

[dazzleman]

Very well said Frodo.

[they don't love you like i love you]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

[dazzleman]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

[they don't love you like i love you]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

such as? Give quotes from them, and me.

[dazzleman]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

such as? Give quotes from them, and me.

Do you really think I'm going to waste my time digging up quotes at your request?  Especially since nothing would ever convince you anyway.

You reek of anti-Americanism.  It must have been those years living on a bleak Indian reservation.

[DarthKosh]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

such as? Give quotes from them, and me.

Do you really think I'm going to waste my time digging up quotes at your request?  Especially since nothing would ever convince you anyway.

You reek of anti-Americanism.  It must have been those years living on a bleak Indian reservation.

Don't you know is don't love Bush Jr then you hate america.

[phk]

The problem for the Democrats is that they will never be perceived as having the cojones to keep the country safe against a real enemy as long as the party's mouthpiece is hate-America groups like moveon.org and people who sound a lot like certain people who post here.

Give evidence that MoveOn hates AMerica. No hating Bush does not equal hating America.

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

such as? Give quotes from them, and me.

Do you really think I'm going to waste my time digging up quotes at your request?  Especially since nothing would ever convince you anyway.

Hilarious.

[RJ]

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

If you don't wholeheatedly agree with the Republican Party, you must be an America-hater!

[dazzleman]

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

If you don't wholeheatedly agree with the Republican Party, you must be an America-hater!

right......

[RJ]

Their hatred of America is evident in their every word, as is yours.

If you don't wholeheatedly agree with the Republican Party, you must be an America-hater!

right......

If you don't approve of drug companies getting richer at the elderly's cost(medicare reform), you must be an America hater.

If you think Congressional district gerrymandering is wrong, you must be an America hater.

If you believe it's wrong for even 1 of those higher ranking Republicans under investigation for crimes common men would be in jail for are guilty or want more info on their activities, you're an America hater.

[AuH2O]

Err, the Democrats gerrymander just as much as Republicans have.... crack whore...

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Err, the Democrats gerrymander just as much as Republicans have.... crack whore...

No

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Err, the Democrats gerrymander just as much as Republicans have.... crack whore...

No

Seen the Maryland map recently?