CT Blue

A good argument can be made that the Democrats lost their Senate majority in 2002, not because they backed the proposed Iraq war too weakly, but because they backed it too much, thus dampening their own turnout. As I recall, not a single Democrat that voted against the war (except in the case of Maloney here in Connecticut whose District was destroyed through redistricting) lost his or her seat, but a number of Senate seats (e.g., Minnesota) were lost through whisper thin margins. Lots of potential Democrats stayed home in disgust, as the party as a whole failed to resist the looming disaster.

Now the Democrats face an even greater challenge. Can they dampen turnout enough in 2008 to turn what should be a great year for them into a disaster? You can’t say they’re not trying. Consider Steny Hoyer, who apparently exists in order to stifle any attempt Nancy Pelosi makes to be progressive:

A top Democratic leader opened the door Tuesday to granting U.S. telecommunications companies retroactive legal immunity for helping the government conduct electronic surveillance without court orders, but said the Bush administration must first detail what those companies did.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said providing the immunity will likely be the price of getting President Bush to sign into law new legislation extending the government’s surveillance authority.

That’s right folks, the Democrats are considering giving the telecoms immunity in order to buy Bush’s signature for a bill that they claim to dislike. Why? Because they want to make sure the whole country knows that they’re still deathly scared of Mr. 29%.:

Two months after insisting that they would roll back broad eavesdropping powers won by the Bush administration, Democrats in Congress appear ready to make concessions that could extend some crucial powers given to the National Security Agency.

…

Although willing to oppose the White House on the Iraq war, they remain nervous that they will be called soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on gathering intelligence.

Seems to me if they had political smarts they would pass the bill without the immunity, let Bush veto it, and then put the onus on him for putting the interests of corporations ahead of the nation. But no, it makes more sense to put a really bad provision into a bill the don’t really want in order to get Bush to sign it so they don’t look weak.

On another front, the Democrats say they can’t make hedge fund billionaires pay the same tax rate that I do because they just won’t be able to get around to it, given all the other wonderful things they need to cave on before they adjourn:

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) has told private-equity firms in recent weeks that a tax-hike proposal they have spent millions of dollars to defeat will not get through the Senate this year, according to executives and lobbyists.

…

In one meeting with industry representatives last month, Reid said the private-equity tax plan would not be considered in the Senate this year, according to a participant. Rather than citing the lobbying push, Reid implied that the reason had to do with the lack of time on the jammed Senate schedule.

Personally I think it’s the compelling arguments offered up by the billionairres for exempting them from taxation:

Their argument was that higher taxes would run counter to accepted tax policy and slow economic growth.

No, no, I’m sorry, here’s their argument:

In response, private-equity firms — whose multibillion-dollar deals have created a class of superwealthy investors and taken some of America’s large corporations private –…. stepped up campaign contributions …”

Yes sir, our Democratic Congress has just filled me with enthusiasm. I just can’t wait to work hard to re-elect a Congress that has guaranteed my right to be spied on by my own government and made sure that, when I become a billionaire without adding to the productive capacity of the country, I will pay a lower tax rate than I do now.

The Republicans have done the best they could to make sure that the Democrats can’t give it away in 2008, but the Democrats aren’t giving up. I’m still betting against the Democrats snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, but the odds are narrowing daily.