The Senate's Dem Skeptics: What's Driving Them?
A group of centrist Democratic senators held their first meeting this week to discuss brewing -- but so far non-specific -- concerns with President Obama's budget.
Many of these emerging Democratic budget skeptics also fought to slim down the economic stimulus bill before it became law next month: Sens. Ben Nelson (NE), Mary Landrieu (LA), Evan Bayh (IN), Mark Begich (AK), Amy Klobuchar (MN), and others were part of influential centrist blocs during the stimulus debate and are likely to keep hold on their power during the budget debate.
Klobuchar told me yesterday that the stimulus negotiations could "potentially" serve as a model for the drafting of the budget. That prospect may give progressives heartburn if increased spending and tax hikes for the wealthy are put on the chopping block to assuage centrist concerns. But as Landrieu explained, the Democratic skeptics have yet to delve into details about what exactly is worth resisting in the president's budget.
Using the public record, however, let's take a look at what motivates three five of the key centrists in this debate:
Nelson: The Nebraska senator, alongside Maine GOP Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, was a major player in the stimulus debate. He has left the door open to supporting a rollback of the Bush tax breaks for wealthy families, as I noted yesterday, but is by no means a sure thing. One budget proposal that's almost certain to run aground on opposition from Nelson is the lowering of the earnings cap on farms that are eligible to receive government subsidy aid, from $750,000 to $500,000.
Landrieu: The Louisianan voted for the 2001 Bush tax breaks and could well oppose a budget that assumes their expiration. She was also one of four Democrats to oppose last year's climate change bill, making her a potential foe of the Obama budget's assumption of more than $75 billion in revenue from auctioning off carbon emissions permits. "Let's enjoin the battle on this year's budget," she said yesterday. "I'm looking forward to a great debate."
Bayh: He voted against the Bush tax cuts in 2001, but appeared to make a 180-degree turn this week, telling Politico that "before we raise revenue, we first should look to see if there are ways we can cut back on spending." Bayh is also a prime candidate to put the brakes on a budgetary effort to address climate change. As Newsweek noted this week, most of his state's power is generated by the coal industry:
[Bayh] has voiced concerns about the Obama proposal. But Bayh won't get to ask questions in [the energy] committee, because the "cap and trade" plan was taken from his jurisdiction and instead given to Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, a strong proponent of the idea.
Never mind that Bayh isn't the chairman of the energy committee -- Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) is. But you get the picture.
Late Update: Here's a bit more background on two more of the senators who attended the first meeting of budget skeptics.
Klobuchar: This freshman senator was part of the bipartisan group that worked out a deal to increase the amount of coastal land open to offshore drilling while enhancing alternative energy benefits -- so her record shows an affinity for reaching consensus with the GOP.
But she sounds hardly reluctant to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest earners, telling MSNBC last week that her constituents "are not whining that much" about rolling back breaks for those making more than $250,000. Klobuchar also defended Obama's vow to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term: "I actually do" believe he can do it, she said.
Begich: As a very new arrival in the Senate, his ultimate stance on the budget may depend more on its potential benefits for his state than on its overall spending levels. In fact, his office issued a release last week touting the budget's multiple goodies for Alaska in detail.


















This is a good start, but I'd like to see, when the time comes, a chart showing specific objections by these legislators compared to their biggest campaign contributors. I suspect these individuals aren't as centrist as special interest-centric.
March 5, 2009 12:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't understand Amy Klobuchar and Mark Begich. The two were two of only a handful of Senators who co-sponsored all 10 Senate Democratic Caucus bills (S.1 through S.10) -- including the universal health care bill (S.4), the global warming bill (S.5), and the education bill (S.7). What did they expect to happen in the budget?
March 5, 2009 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
They're preening attention whores, that's what drive them.
March 5, 2009 12:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Co-sign. Especially Nelson.
I have also come to the conclusion that Landrieu, Nelson and Bayh are all at the left hand tail of the Senate Democratic Causus' mental wattage curve.
March 5, 2009 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
These people make me sick. Centrist MY ASS.
March 5, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see: the Democrats need 51 votes in the Senate to pass the budget. (Filibusters are not allowed.) There are 56 Democratic Senators and 2 Independent Senators who caucus with the Democrats. That's 58.
This article lists five "centrist" Democratic Senators who oppose the budget.
58 - 5 = 53.
F 'em. And the horse they rode in on.
I mean, sure, discuss minor changes with them, but certainly nothing like wholesale revisions we saw on the stimulus bill.
March 5, 2009 1:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's not quite true.
Some "budget points of order" require 60 votes to pass in the Senate. Points of order may be raised by a Senate member against legislation or an amendment if it violates spending and revenue levels as contained in the most recent budget resolution or if it violates other budget laws and rules.
A point of order, if raised, removes a bill, amendment, or offending provision from legislative consideration. In the Senate, some points of order can be waived with a simple majority, but most require a higher threshold to waive, usually 60 votes.
More information
March 5, 2009 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're misreading that. It applies to determining whether subsequent legislation fits within the guidelines of the budget resolution, NOT to the adoption of the budget resolution itself.
March 5, 2009 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm fairly sure that Steve is correct. Look at this overview page from the source you linked above.
March 5, 2009 1:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's Driving Them?
Power.
The power of leverage. They hold the high trump cards
March 5, 2009 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? 58 - 5 = 53. 53 > 51.
March 5, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually we only need 50 senators. If its a tie, a certain prominent ex-senator gets a say.
March 5, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
True dat, AND hopefully the 58 will soon become 59. No reason to make more than token concessions to the Blue Moron Caucus.
March 5, 2009 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
What did Amy Klobuchar (MN) do during the stimulus debate?
March 5, 2009 1:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
She did what every other Senate Democrat (except Ted Kennedy) did -- she voted for the bill.
On an unrelated topic, I give Amy huge points for voting for TARP II a month and a half ago and also for opposing the Ensign amendment to the DC Voting Rights Bill that passed last week.
Still, this is embarrassing. I didn't expect this of Amy, who I generally consider a loyal Democrat. Particularly when she co-sponsored the caucus's universal health care bill (S.4), the global warming bill (S.5), and the education bill (S.7), I'm really disappointed in Amy for this. What did Amy honestly expect? Could Amy at least not go to Politico to denounce publicly the President's plans and talk to the President privately before a bill is crafted?
March 5, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
These "centrists" are really corporatists who call themselves Democrats at election time but who do little other than the bidding of their masters who are the agents of predatory wealth. I hope the new organization designed to challenge these DINO's takes after each one of them with a vengeance.
March 5, 2009 1:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here, here! Drop kick those right wing faux centrists out into the cold come election time.
And if Obama has the votes, he needs to push as much as he can now while he still has a huge amount of power. And remember Franken will be in soon. Now he's more of a financial centrist than any of these bozos even though he's a social liberal.
TPM, can you quit calling these people "centrists?" I think it just feeds incorrect perceptions about Democrats and/or the Obama admin.
March 5, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are all from conservative dominated states. They have to make some noise to maintain their local bonafides. That's how the game works.
March 5, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama won Indiana and Minnesota.
March 5, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're prepared to argue that Indiana is not a conservative state? It is, at best, purple.
I agree about Minnesota, though the state tends to be more red once you get under the national level at election time.
You conveniently left out Nebraska, Louisiana and Alaska.
Saladin has it right. The noise from these five senators is largely for the consumption of voters back home. They'll ultimately come on board.
March 6, 2009 8:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
It sounds like these "centrists" are leveraging the tax issue to extract other concessions.
March 5, 2009 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those Blue Dogs may be annoying, but do remember the Democratic Party that Truman, Kennedy and Johnson had to deal with.
March 5, 2009 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Something about Bayh..I just don't like him.
First pic you see when you Google him makes him look like a slick car salesman.
March 6, 2009 12:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Get used to seeing him for a while. He's a former two-term governor with a gold-plated family name in his state. Bayh is likely to be re-elected until he (a) runs for higher office, (b) gets a Cabinet job, or (c) dies. (Sad, but true.)
March 6, 2009 9:02 AM | Reply | Permalink