Six for ’06

July 27, 2006

I’ve been supportive of the idea that [tag]congress[/tag]ional [tag]Democrat[/tag]s should remind voters of their differences with the [tag]GOP[/tag], and explain to the electorate what a Dem Congress would do differently than what we have now. It now appears that the party is taking the strategy pretty seriously.

[tag]Democrats[/tag] plan to press for a minimum wage increase and “tough, smart” national security in their final push to wrest power from the Republicans in the November elections.

House and Senate Democrats will hold a joint meeting on Thursday to discuss events planned for the 100 days leading up to midterm congressional elections and lay out their party agenda, called “A [tag]New Direction[/tag] for America.”

I’ve obtained a copy of the agenda — which Dems have labeled “[tag]Six for ’06[/tag]” — and it hits all of the high points.

1. “Real Security at Home and Overseas” — phased redeployment in Iraq, send expanded Special Forces to get bin Laden, implement 9/11 Commission agenda

2. “Better American Jobs. Better Pay” — made congressional pay raise conditional on minimum wage increase, end tax breaks for companies that outsource

3. “College Access for All” — make college tuition “permanently” tax deductible, cut student loan interest rates, expand Pell Grants

4. “Energy Independence. Lower Gas Prices” — initiatives for energy-efficient technologies and alternative fuels, new laws against gas price gouging, end “tax giveaways to Big Oil”

5. “Affordable Health Care” — fix Medicare Part D, fund stem-cell research, negotiate lower prescription drug prices, end tax giveaways to drug companies and HMOs

6. “Retirement Security and Dignity” — beat back Social Security privatization (again), pension reform, expand personal savings incentives

There are a few ways to look at this.

From the outset, I like the fact that it’s relatively short. No one remembers this, but in previous campaign cycles, including the last one, congressional Dems produced lists of legislative initiatives the party could get behind. The lists would routinely includes dozens of items, which no one could remember. “Six for ’06” is a bit of a misnomer — each of the six include multiple ideas — but it’s still a victory for brevity.

Second, I’m glad the national security bullet-point is first. Dems can’t expect to win on domestic policy alone. The war is the biggest issue on the landscape and there’s no reason in the world for the party to try and sidestep foreign policy.

And third, I actually like the specific policy prescriptions. These are six solid points that hit all of the major concerns. The agenda looks even better considering the fact that Republicans haven’t offered a word about their own policy agenda for the future.

That’s the good news. I also have a couple of concerns.

Most notably, I can’t help but feel a certain sense of deja vu here. In June, congressional Dems unveiled a domestic policy agenda. In March, they unveiled a national security/foreign policy agenda. In July, they’re back again, unveiling another agenda, which presumably will be the last one. It suggests a certain haphazard quality in the planning stages — did the party really need three different roll-outs to effectively say the same thing?

Moreover, Adele Stan raised a good point.

When I read of the plan in today’s Associated Press story by Liz Sidoti, I found yet another laundry list of fix-it items, all worthy, but none of them big enough to raise gooseflesh on the arms of likely voters.

Calling the agenda “A New Direction for America,” the Democrats list a number of laudable plans on the following: income, national security, energy, education, health care and retirement accounts. Swell. But as the Prospect’s Robert Reich pointed out (PDF) some time ago, the Republicans have never won on the particulars; they have won on the narrative. And once again, it seems, the Democrats will offer no story of America, no heroic theme, to which they can hitch that agenda.

It’s a fair point. The agenda has a vague laundry-list quality, and there’s no real theme or narrative that ties the points together.

So, what do you think of Six for ’06?

With the right track wrong track numbers the way they are, do we really need a theme? If we do it should be # 1: Real Security at Home and Overseas. This wraps all the other points togeather. “Better American Jobs. Better Pay” + “College Access for All” + “Energy Independence. Lower Gas Prices” + “Affordable Health Care” + “Retirement Security and Dignity” = REAL SECURITY AT HOME AND OVERSEAS!

  • The content and vagueness of this agenda makes me wonder if this is more aimed at the press than the voting public.

    Increasingly, polling data makes it look like the general discontent with Republican misrule might indeed be enough to turn over control of one or both houses of Congress. One little problem, though, which the Republicans would be sure to exploit, is that the corporate media could advance a storyline that “the Democrats have no ideas.” This switches the debate back to the “Democrats are weak” meta-theme… which, we know, can be a killer.

    Now at least the Democrats have a counter to that line. While this document might not be a barn-burner, and I can’t imagine that it will change the discourse even as much as the Contract on America (another document more aimed toward the press than the voters) did, at least it compiles some popular moves and does, in some sense, represent an agenda.

  • The Republics have screwed things up so badly that Good looks GREAT. It will take a heroic effort to get this country back on track after the train wreck of 8 Bush years.

  • The seventh: Impeach the birdbrain and the evil Cheney: hold them accountable.

    Actually I love the laundry list. It’s all stuff that needs to be done yesterday. I think it’s a winner.

  • In Republican circles the narrative pretty much consists of heinous mudslinging and merciless swiftboating of rivals, plus good old fashioned fear-mongering.

    For them it worked, which is why they keep doing it. Dems don’t believe in it so they’re pretty much stuck with trying to promote a positive vision for the future. Totally lacking in drama, of course, but what can they do without going over to the Dark Side themselves?

    It’s definitely a problem for the marketing people, no doubt about it. Having scruples usually is.

  • Democrats need to hammer the point that they are working for your interest, not the special interests. In a 30-second spot, take any one of the 6 topics; show how the proposal works toward that end, in your interest.

    Always compare and contrast, middle-class economic security vs. trickle-down/vacuum-up GOP policies now in place. Keep asking, “how is that working for you?”

  • Six for ’06 is bad, sorry. It’s really bad, it’s not catchy and it’s too broad. This is American and if there is one thing we as a nation have, that is ADD.

    “Descentsy, Diplomacy, Democracy, Vote D this fall, vote for the Democratic Party and let us change how you feel about YOUR government.

    “We will change how you feel about YOUR government”

    “It’s YOUR government, take it back”

    Something to make people feel apart of something, especially change. People want to be coddled, not lectured.

  • Here’s the deal, you have to fight bumper-sticker talking points with bumper sticker talking points. If we can learn anything from republicans it is how to effectively campaign.
    They say Dems have no plan and every Dem candidate can say ” I support the 6 for ’06” and hit the highlights.

    If they say cut and run Dems say “redeploy and stay engaged AND hunt down Bin Laden”

    If they say strong economy Dems say “End tax breaks for outsourcing American Jobs”

    If they say education (yeah right) Dems say “affordable higher ed”

    If they say gas prices Dems say “Alternative energy and no more tax breaks for Exxon”

    If they say healthcare Dems say “close the doughnut hole in Medicare prescription drugs. Allow plan to negotiate prices”

    I does not matter beyond that. People only need to hear their Democratic candidate listing off easy to understand positions that promise better results than Republicans. The policy heavy detailed explainations fall on deaf ears. Dumb it down and we are in much better shape. yes it is sad and pathetic and below the standards of most dems but first you have to win then you can govern!

  • Overall, pretty good.

    Would like to see some mention of North Korea, Iran and maybe China in the foreign policy section. In 10 years, NK and Iran will have nukes, and China will be vying with us tete-a-tete for title of world superpower. If we don’t start looking ahead to how we will handle those situations, we won’t be prepared.

    (switching to domestic issues) For the middle class voters that want results now, I don’t see much that will appeal to them except maybe the college tuition provisions.

    I think #5 should be called “affordable medicine”, since it doesn’t really address the cost of health insurance, or treatments. Recent legislative battle notwithstanding, I don’t think “support stem cell research!” is going to work as a rallying cry. 🙂

    I just hope that the well-thought out ideas don’t get drowned out by silly political bickering.

  • “A New Direction for America.”

    Assuming that it does replace the heinous “Together, We Can Do Better” catch phrase, I like it. As for the 6 items on the agenda, I like them. As for whether or not we need a narrative to win, I’m not convinced that the GOP’s “God, Guns and Gays” narrative is all that effective.

    Finally, praise the supreme being of your choice that the list is short! Now can we just get smart about the theatrics and put a laminated copy of this agenda in every congresscritter’s jacket? And every challenger to an incumbent? They need to pull it out at every opportunity and speak to whichever item is relevant or that they care most about. Every time. Every Dem.

  • I like the idea, but as others have pointed out, it’s the language that’s lacking. The right won by sprinkling every debate on every issue with emotional words carefully crafted to garner a response, and the left needs to do the same. MNProgressive started a damn fine list.

    The only way they’re going to get the votes is to create the language necessary to inspire people to the polls. Otherwise, it’s all just hollow blustering.

  • Here’s the deal, you have to fight bumper-sticker talking points with bumper sticker talking points. If we can learn anything from republicans it is how to effectively campaign.

    Absolutely. And I suggest we use the following as our bumper stickers:

    6 for ’06

    short, sweet, reinforces the overall agenda and gets people who might not otherwise be engaged asking “what does that mean?”. Nothing quite like a mystery to engage people.

  • I like: Had enough? I’m Bushed.

    Missing: Affordable health care for ALL – so is it true that only us leftists support universal health insurance? I’ve read that the Democrats, for the most part, have abandoned this goal.

  • Flat….utterly flat with an electorate this culturally, morally and intellectually this bankrupt.

    Would be great to get Democrats running for office to agree to be their own person and speak from their heart with passion instead of putting out empty marketing rhetoric.

    That would be an accomplishment.

    Regards,

    Patrick

  • Most notably, I can’t help but feel a certain sense of deja vu here. In June, congressional Dems unveiled a domestic policy agenda. In March, they unveiled a national security/foreign policy agenda. In July, they’re back again, unveiling another agenda, which presumably will be the last one. It suggests a certain haphazard quality in the planning stages — did the party really need three different roll-outs to effectively say the same thing?

    I disagree. The unveiling of their policy agendas received almost *no* mainstream press coverage (pundits were complaining the *same week* that the dems “didn’t have a plan”). So I think that its all they can do the make another announcement. They can’t make people report it.

    Would be great to get Democrats running for office to agree to be their own person and speak from their heart with passion instead of putting out empty marketing rhetoric.

    Yeah, then we can listen to Cokie Roberts talk about how “dems are all over the place”. If they speak with one voice, they’re “trying to sound unified”, and if they don’t, they’re “all over the place”. Its just so much easier to be a republican: no one doubts your motives.

  • The “Contract With America” had eight “major reforms” and ten proposed bills. http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/CONTRACT.html

    Six is fine.

    Just make sure all the Dems can recite them, so we don’t get embarrassed. (like when the ten commandments idiots couldn’t remember them)

    Of course it would be fun to list out how much of their “contract” they violated, and beat them over the head with it.

  • I like the bumper sticker I saw here in SE Idaho (of all freakin’ redder than red places!!).

    Similar to Newt’s, it just said:

    Enough is Enough
    Vote Democratic

  • Good point about the lack of heroic theme.

    I like it for itself and for its shortness, but would I if I were a Republican? Or would the fact that it sounds like Democratic progressive same old, same old reassure me that nothing is too bad with the Republican side? For surely if there was anything wrong with Republicans, the Dems would say so?

    It plays awfully nice. The Republicans never played nice. They accused Clinton and all Dems of cowardice, of loose morals, of big spending, of weak on defense.

    Now if we lead with something about how we need to get the Repubs out of office because they’re too lazy and incompetent to mount a good defense, so they’ve left this country vulnerable —- well, that would be the truth and it might raise a few hairs.

  • The six for ’06 all ring true to all loyal dems, but I think we all know, from talking to our own circle of friends that many many people are FED UP with BushCo. I have heard many times that “our country is in bad shape.” I think the Dems could use these 6 ideas well, but I think they also need to give America hope, give us some positive stroking that we really are a great nation. Dem politicians need to start the rhetoric of bringing this country together again. We are the “United” States. Right now we are the divided states of America.

  • Here’s a genuinely tried and true campaign slogan the Demos can use this election cycle, and in the next. Before I spell it out here, I need to give you a bit of background. This effective slogan references a man who most probably would not recognize, let alone be welcomed in, today’s Republican party. I say this because our political culture has been skewed so far to the right over the past two decades this individual’s ideas and policies could very easily be seen in a liberal light today. Yet, at the time, his policies were representative of a moderate conservatism.

    By employing this slogan, the Demos (a party I am not affiliated with) can shed some light on how the Republican party has gone so astray. All the Demos need do is talk about the slogan bearer’s biography, his record, and his caution for the American people upon his departure from office.

    Okay, here’s the slogan: I LIKE IKE!

    -Kevo

  • P.S. My first post above is in reference to capturing the American narrative in the next two election cycles. -Kevo

  • I, too, like the slogans with “taking your country back” and “i want my country back” — i think a candidate with those kinds of slogans would surely garner widespread support. . .

    . . . oh wait, those are the exact slogans Dean used in ’04 and I stood virtually by myself in the Dean “group” in a crowded caucus hall while scores of zombie-looking folk gathered in support for the Massachusetts Milquetoast (did he even have a slogan? does anyone remember it?)

    no i’m not still bitter 2 years later or anything. not me.

  • I think this accomplishes most of it’s business under the radar, as it were. On one hand, you could argue that it’s yet another laundry list, but on the other, it’s a bit more subversive. It spells out what repubs are NOT, and in a pretty damning way. It frames the contrast in a way that hangs the popular frustration squarely around the republicans’ necks. I’ll give it a B+

  • ***Republicans have never won on the particulars; they have won on the narrative. And once again, it seems, the Democrats will offer no story of America, no heroic theme, to which they can hitch that agenda.***

    Then give it back to the Republikanner beast, as it has given it to the decent portion of the world. You want a story of America? Let’s consider who was in the catbird’s seat when the worries about ObL were bouncing about—before 9/11. Let’s consider who was in charge when the run-up to Iraq was being planned—on false, misleading, and intentionally-created information. Let’s look at who was the deciding factor when Katrina blew up all over the place, or when Med-D turned into a joke. Take all the screw-ups; all the stupidity; all the criminal actions against both Constitution and Country—and remind the people that the GOP side of the Hill defended every one of these wrongful, damaging, and dangerous actions—just because the guy doing all the wrong stuff belonged to “their” political party. Clinton got oral sex and lied; Bush lied to get a war.

    You want heroic images? Crumpled firefighter helmets and crushed fire engines. The charred wall of the Pentagon. A cratered field in Pennsylvania. Blown-up humvees. Flag-draped coffins. The Enron sign. Fires in Beirut, Tyre, and Baghdad. Gas stations with outrageous prices. People paddling a canoe in the open waters of the North Pole (and they want us to believe that global warming is a joke). All signs that this nation, no matter how badly it—and the entire world—has been treated by its current government, has managed to hang in there; has somehow continued to limp along on the slimmest of dreams that somehow—someday—things would get better.

    The time for things to get better, methinks, is here. Here—and now

  • I wrote Senator Reid, who had a post over on HuffPo, that I think the slogan and the program are too tepid. For a slogan, someone suggested Get Real, America. I think you need something like that because the country needs a wake-up call or we are going down the tubes if the Rethugs stay in. I think the program is the typical warm, fuzzy approach too. Where and when do the Democrats ever address the War in Iraq? It’s not enough to say, we won’t do it again. We have to deal with this for-real war right now. And let’s face it, there is a growing class divide in the country that is downright scary. Where are the Dems on getting back all the money the rich have scooped in from the middle and poor classes? Reid’s statement on the environment or global warming is too mild too. No one in the Dem party ever talks about the consitutional violations of this administration either. I just could go on and on but will stop here. The people are ready for someone with balls.

  • Be BOLD! Make a prediction! Promise something big! Take a risk for Pete’s sake! Republicans, have learned that to win elections, you have to gamble. For instance, we keep advocating stem-cell research, but become tentative when it comes to predicting dramatic results. Oh, I know it’s not scientifically sound to promise cures, but that’s what the fence-straddlers want to hear! If was THEIR issue, Don’t be afraid of “C” word (cures) assure you they would go out on a limb. Why take a chance? It gets you elected! Hope is a mighty thing! History has shown you don’t pay huge price if you get it wrong, but will reap huge benefits if the “gamble” pays off!

    If not stem-cell research, then find something else.

  • there’s no real theme or narrative that ties the points together.

    First off I like the slogan “Six for ’06”. Second, I think there is a theme hiding just below the surface:BushCo broke it and we’re going to fix it.

  • Bush’s Legacy: Our macabre inheritance

    A little more than sixty-percent of Americans have a favorable impression of the Democratic and Republican parties. Americans overwhelmingly support the generic Democratic agenda of increasing the minimum wage, stem cell research, and national security policies. They will be this touting “message” as “A New Direction for America”. Most Americans would like to elect a Democrat to congress in this year’s midterm elections.
    The Democrats have many hurdles to overcome. Control of the House of Representatives rests for Democrats and Republicans on candidates in approximately thirty-five swing districts. Democratic voters in other districts are pretty much wasting their time voting for their party’s congressional candidates.
    Gerrymandering has rendered voting for congressional representatives a nullity in nearly four-hundred house districts drawn to elect a Republican or a Democrat before one vote is cast. In many districts the Republican or Democratic incumbent will run unopposed. We call this democracy.
    This year look for Republicans to run district campaigns. Once identified Republican candidates will pound Democratic candidates into the ground early and often with character destructive messages . If Democrats could run with an overarching national message it’s possible a House majority may be theirs. The real question rests on two factors, can the Democratic message hydra be tamed before Labor Day, and will domestic issues be on the minds of voters when they enter the polls?
    It seems until now getting the Democrats to articulate a consistent message has not happened since Bill Clinton left office. This relatively simple feat for Democrats is easier than herding cats, wrestling a greased pig….
    On the foreign policy front, if Democrats speak in vague “diplo-speak, which is their muddle-headed way, watch the Repubs again brand them as not only soft on terrorism, but question their loyal to Israel.
    On both the domestic and foreign policy issues if Democrats allow Republicans to draw them into a debate of nuisances–the proverbial how many angels can dance on the head a pin–they will lose.
    Will Democrats run such a straight forward campaign, probably not.
    Bush has left his legacy. We are committed to maintaining our military presence in Iraq until 2020-2025, possibly even longer if the county is partitioned. The horrible reality is some of our children who begin kindergarten this fall will die in Iraq.
    We will support Israel with military aid including American troops if hostilities continue and Iran and Syria become directly involved. Is our policy a strategy of “spheres of influence” with the U.S. staking-out the Mid-East?
    No matter what party wins or loses in ’06 or ’08, this war will skyrocket Federal deficit spending as far as the eye can see. Domestic spending increases will be pie-in-the-sky without tax hikes and means testing of all safety net programs, including Social Security. These domestic cuts do not include the back-door budget slashes Bush made in order to fund his tax cuts. Many of these cuts do not become effective until after he leaves office.
    This is the Bush legacy. It is the macabre inheritance both Republicans and Democrats will confront for generations. .

  • Wow…just saw an article that said Republicans in the House were going to push for passing a minimum wage increase. That’s a pretty interesting strategy. It’s almost as though they looked at the 6 in ’06, and said “hey, if we steal one of theirs, then they’ll only have 5, and they’ll have to change their slogan!” 🙂

    Interesting philosophical question: do you get credit for doing the right thing for the wrong reasons?

  • This is the only dem plan that seems to hold any weight.

    Let me explain, it was stated somewhere that the average american attention span is about 10s, so any plan that can’t get a point fully formed in that time is not presented well and more or less worthless

    I skimed the other dem plans (for roughly ten seconds) looking for anything, and didn’t find anything, this is the first thing that people will actually be able to pay attention to.

    Someone over at the DNC must have known that or they would have not made this so short at to the point.

  • Maybe I just can’t be pithy enough:

    “If you want the Government in your bedroom, vote Republican.”

    “If you want the Government in your meat packing plant, vote Democratic.”

    As in:

    “If you want the Government in your bedroom telling you how to put it, where to put it and who you can put it in, vote Republican.”

    “If you want the Government in your meat packing plant telling them what to put in, how to put it in, and when to throw it out, vote Democratic.”

    Honestly, I think that is all you have to say.

  • How about this:

    Governing in the US is an impossible task, so why not give us another chance? We can’t screw it up any worse than the Republicans already have.

    Or:
    Unsustainable growth for an unsustainable future.

    Or:
    Filling American’s tanks with more hype than hope.

    Or:
    Passing the bill to a new generation.

    Don’t worry, I’ll be voting dem. But I don’t expect much from Washington regardless of who wins.

  • Personally, I’m not looking for goosebumps. I think the 3 branch gov’t is pretty a good system. I just want people to stop messing it up. Everytime I hear about a new piece of legislation – I think just leave it alone. I would like a do-nothing congress, When they do something it merely puts taxpayer money into the hands of some large corporation. Or they write laws that are like the fine print on cell phone contracts. I would just like them to their jobs competently. Conduct their oversight of the executive, watch out for waste and fraud on gov’t contracts particularly miliatary ones (every bad project, every bad deal damages our security and our place in the world). We’ve turned into the huge beaurcratic state where money must cross palms to get anything done that we used to mock the USSR for.

    I don’t want a NEW vision, just get those greedy arrogant bastards to work fulfilling the original one.

  • I worry about the democrats trying to preach to the choir so to speak. They don’t have to convince the progressive, reality based community or most independents that they offer a better model of governance. They have to wrestle back the ‘Reagan democrats’; the voters from the south and midwest that have been fooled by wedge issues to vote republican, against their best interests. These people respond and take interest when issues are boiled down to their most basic terms. Therefore, the dems must ‘water down’ the debate into an easily understood comparison/contrast of the two competing parties. 6 for ’06 is a good start, but I think the dems are once again bordering on being too verbose. In the era of the 30 second soundbite, their soundbite must be more potent and succinct than the repubs.

  • There is a theme that ties them together (the last five at least) — protecting the economic security of families. Better jobs, better pay, college access, affordable healthcare, lower gas prices, retirement security — how can you say there’s not a theme?!

    • Comments are closed.