| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Waxman sees bright side to November: 'Difficult' Democrats won't be back |
| 2010-08-06 |
| Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) believes the November elections will likely weed out some of the "most difficult Democrats" that leadership lawmakers have dealt with this Congress. In an interview with The Hill, the Energy and Commerce Committee chairman expressed confidence that Democrats will retain the House, and suggested he won't miss some of the Democrats who won't be back next year. "I think a lot of the House seats we're going to lose are those who have been the toughest for the Democrats to pull into line -- the Democrats that have been the most difficult," Waxman said. Waxman, one of the Democratic Party's stalwarts, is simply voicing publicly what many in his party have said privately as the reality of the looming November elections sets in. If Democrats retain a majority, it will be smaller but more cohesive. As Waxman sees it, the fractious coalition of Democrats that House leaders have cobbled together to pass sweeping healthcare and energy bills is not markedly different from the bipartisanship of the past, when Democrats partnered with centrist and liberal Republicans, whom Waxman says are "practically nonexistent at the moment." "We've been trying to get the Democratic conservatives together with the rest of the Democratic Party, so in effect we've gotten bipartisan support among Democrats in the House," the chairman said with a laugh. "Now we'll have to work on genuine bipartisanship in the future." For much of the early part of his career, the liberal Waxman battled conservative Democrats from the South on the direction of the party. Years later, Waxman is still waging that fight, but now he wields the gavel of one of the most powerful panels in Congress. Waxman became chairman after successfully challenging Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), the former chairman, in 2008. Waxman has rewarded loyalty to the Democratic agenda through his leadership political action committee, L.A. PAC. Each of the 14 donations of $5,000 the committee made after the final healthcare vote in March went to Democrats who voted yes. A single contribution of a lesser amount, $3,000, was sent in April to Rep. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho), one of the party's most vulnerable members, who voted against the bill. In January, Waxman gave $10,000 to Rep. Zack Space (D-Ohio), a month after he voted for the initial House version of healthcare reform. Two months later, Space voted against the final bill. Democratic conservatives serve little purpose for Waxman, who seemed to relish the thought that a strengthened GOP would mean that the minority party would have to play ball. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #13 A solid-hickory axehandle right across the bridge of the nose, as hard as I can swing. The list of people I'd love to do that to is growing longer every day. It's absolutely amazing that our country functions at all with all the idiots in government - at most levels and in most offices, including the military. With pay-per-view, or selling tickets, we could wipe out the national debt by Christmas. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2010-08-06 22:33 |
| #12 I thought somebody already did that -- I mean, isn't that why he looks like the Phantom of the Opera? |
| Posted by: Gabby 2010-08-06 18:07 |
| #11 Pay-per-view. And what's wrong with good-old american steel? |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2010-08-06 18:02 |
| #10 I'd think a Louisville Slugger would be more effective, Mike. Wouldn't wood be heavier than aluminum? I'll hold you coat in either case. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-08-06 17:06 |
| #9 With your permission Mike, I'd like to watch. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-08-06 16:12 |
| #8 I really really want to hit Waxman in the face with an aluminum baseball bat. (no threat implied)[sarc] |
| Posted by: Mike Hunt 2010-08-06 16:10 |
| #7 What a leader he is! You can see why the intelligentsia in Beverly Hills keep re-electing him, can't you? |
| Posted by: mojo 2010-08-06 12:29 |
| #6 It's more fun for the ideologically pure (of all flavors) to be in the minority where they don't have to take responsibility for their cockamanie ideas being put into actual practice. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2010-08-06 11:52 |
| #5 Most of the libs don't see it this way. To them, the moderate Dems are vital to disguising the nature of the Dem party (e.g., all the American Flags and a few token and/or temporary pro-life speakers at the Dem convention) and without the disguise, the Dems are toast in middle America. |
| Posted by: lord garth 2010-08-06 09:59 |
| #4 What the man is telling the fools is that those in safe districts who accumulate seniority are more than happy to toss your sorry asses after using them to gain points with their factions. You were all expendable fools. Note to the new class of 2011, kill seniority for your own self preservation. They play the game on both sides of the aisle. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2010-08-06 09:08 |
| #3 Does Waxman ever think how much easier he could make things for the USA if HE resigned? |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-08-06 02:59 |
| #2 You ain't seen difficult yet Waxman. Don't tread on me. |
| Posted by: Snusoter Fillmore9811 2010-08-06 00:21 |
| #1 Nuthin like a good purge, eh Henry? Cleans out the "ideologically impure"... |
| Posted by: tu3031 2010-08-06 00:11 |