An article at The Hill, apparently inspired by a
New York Times article, begins:
Moderate Democrats are pushing back at Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-Mass.) view that progressives have taken control of the party.
“We can't win the House back with progressives running in swing states,” said former Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), a surrogate for 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton who is leading the Fight Back California super PAC aimed at winning back seven House seats in the Golden State.
Interviews with Democratic strategists, donors and organizers from across the country reveal deep disagreement with Warren’s premise that progressives make up the “heart and soul” of the Democratic Party.
Warren offered that synopsis during a speech at the liberal Netroots Nation conference last weekend, adding that progressives are in control of the party.
The Democrats who disagree with Warren are generally from the center of the party, and many were staunch supporters of former President Barack Obama and Clinton.
The clash is further proof of the divide in the party after 2016’s disappointment. Even as they face a Republican Party torn over how to deal with President Trump, Democrats are still trying to figure out what kind of a party they are.
Centrist Dems push back on Warren
The article never identifies much of anything that actually distinguishes “centrist” or “moderate” Democrats from the “progressive” variety. It names “a single-payer healthcare system” as one one of “the many progressive issues”. But among the people I know who identify as Democrats (and some of whom might be considered “centrist” or “moderate” Democrats), I know of none who are
against a single-payer system. Nevertheless, one cannot pull a single-payer health care system out of one's hat--one must write the statutes that will implement such a system, and one must convince a whole segment of the population that it is a good and necessary system. I am for a single-payer system primarily because I think it will probably be less expensive than the ACA. But I also think it might be wise to not eliminate the whole health insurance industry that employs people and pays taxes. Perhaps the single-payer plan could allow for a degree of incentive for people who can afford insurance to buy it. I don't think Americans need any easier access to prescription drugs at the moment (especially opioids). As things are now, Americans are making themselves fat and sick and dead with prescription drugs.
The article also states:
The Obama and Clinton supporters say they have grown tired of having to deal with fighting over progressivism and 1990s-era battles over former President Bill Clinton’s work on welfare and criminal justice reform, which were campaign issues last year and subjects of criticism by Warren just last week.
I don't know what is being referred to here as “progressivism,” but I would definitely support changes to some of the the 1990s-era welfare and “criminal justice” legislation.
So what else distinguishes “centrist” and “progressive” Democrats? The issues identified here do not seem worthy of splitting the party.
Perhaps rather than empty adjectives such as “progressive” and “centrist,” there should just be one party of “Democrats”.
