Splits and compromises in the Democratic Party are the operative words in this political season. They were manifested regarding the recent vote on the $1.1 trillion spending bill, the recent Senate Intelligence Committee report on torture and within the ranks of the Democratic Party, where it could prove even more disastrous than the midterm election setbacks.
The most telling fissure among the Democrats is between with the centrist-moderates on one side and the progressive-populists on the other, the former personified by Hillary Clinton, the presumptive presidential candidate in 2016, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, who is being pushed to run for the White House.
The Dems’ differences were clearly evident during the spending bill tussle, with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi at odds with President Barack Obama, who supported the measure, citing it as the best deal they can get under the current Congress. Pelosi, like Warren, opposed the bill, mainly because it gutted the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory law and at the same time stitched on a provision allowing rich donors to contribute larger sums of money to national political parties.
Meanwhile, there was some division on whether punitive action was warranted for those involved in the torture administered by the CIA and other operatives. Obama was not about to advocate punishment and generally stood beside the CIA and its current director, John Brennan. Several Democrats took exception, believing the violations deserved appropriate penalties.
When it comes to some of the splits among the Dems, it may be attributable to the party’s struggle to appeal to constituents within the party, particularly women and African-Americans, as they consider what position to take on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Women and Black Americas, according to a recent GfK Internet poll, are more inclined to want the U.S. to lean toward neither side of the conflict. On this issue, female respondents outnumber their male counterparts by 10 percent. “African-Americans respondents also overwhelmingly favor neutrality, with 80 percent saying the United States should lean toward neither side,” the report indicated.
What this portends is that the more liberal wing of the Democratic Party will most likely side women and African-Americans on the Middle East conflict, while the moderate wing will side with Israel, thereby creating turmoil in the ranks.
Then there is the pressing matter of immigration reform, in which the president has exercised his executive authority to shield millions of undocumented immigrants from deportation. How this measure will play out among moderate senators, who generally opposed the action, is another major concern for party unity. A number of Democrats expressed their disgust that the president went ahead with the proposal before they could finish the business on the spending bill.
Even so, much of the discussion about division in the Democratic Party may be a bit overblown, and we certainly have to consider the source from which the stories emanate. The real test of party unity is still a few turns of the calendar away and will hit the ground meaningfully by the time of the Democratic primaries. By then, we should know exactly the impact of a so-called split and if a Clinton versus Warren engagement materializes.
In the end, the party will probably see the light and realize they need both wings in order to fly and keep control of the executive branch of government.
