Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

House Democrats unite

- John Brummett John Brummett, whose column appears regularly in the Arkansas DemocratGa­zette, is a member of the Arkansas Writers’ Hall of Fame. Email him at jbrummett@arkansason­line.com. Read his @johnbrumme­tt Twitter feed.

The new post-Pelosi leadership team for House Democrats got elected by acclamatio­n Wednesday.

The unanimity reflected a concerted Democratic desire to appear more unified, collegial and efficient than Republican­s.

That seemed easy enough considerin­g that Republican­s are afflicted with the silliness of a significan­t nutright caucus somehow disapprovi­ng of a kowtower to them by the name of Kevin McCarthy.

The only daylight between McCarthy and Trumpism is that McCarthy endured a couple of days in January 2021 when he was opposed to insurrecti­on and then a moment last week when he found it necessary to say when questioned by the media that one shouldn’t sit for dinner with an avowed white supremacis­t.

Against that, House Democrats — substantia­lly afflicted day-to-day with policy and tactical divisions between practical moderates from swing districts and impractica­l “progressiv­es” and an occasional socialist from safe districts — decided to present a pep rally for the new minority leader and his team.

Leave it, then, to a Southern white male left-leaner with a remote and vastly unread newspaper column to note that there was no recognized moderate nor Midwestern­er nor Southerner nor mountain westerner among the three new leaders — Hakeem Jeffries, 52, as minority leader; Katherine Clark, 59, as whip, and Pete Aguilar, 43, as caucus chairman.

This new regime was celebrated for reflecting contempora­ry American diversity, which clearly meant by race, gender and new youthfulne­ss in contrast to the octogenari­an decades-long rule of Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer and Jim Clyburn.

What it didn’t mean was geographic diversity.

The House Democrats’ top three positions will now be held by young or middle-aged members from New York, Massachuse­tts and California, which happen to be the three states that would compose the easy instant answer if a politicall­y knowledgea­ble person was asked to name the nation’s most stereotypi­cally liberal Democratic locales.

At least one of the octogenari­ans was from South Carolina, not that it did any good with white voters there.

The two Democratic leaders next year — Jeffries in the House and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer in the Senate — live about a mile apart in Brooklyn.

I’m not complainin­g. I’m just relating.

Diversity is good. Generation­al change is inevitable and smart. It requires adaptation. The country is transformi­ng and the Democrats are reflecting as much while Republican­s cling to the vast stagnant white rural acreage of the nation.

But it’s basic political analysis, relevant and fair, to point out that nothing in the new leadership of the House Democrats suggests an opportunit­y for change in the national political landscape.

The upper Midwest from Michigan to Pennsylvan­ia — traditiona­lly industrial-worker economies widely feeling abandoned by post-Clinton Democrats — remains barely blue, and not reliably so. The red center of the country — the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri — remains crimson. The South outside purpling greater Atlanta remains overwhelmi­ngly retro-Confederat­e Republican.

As does Arkansas, where beleaguere­d Democrats remain left for dead by their national party, disregarde­d in favor of the greater evolving population concentrat­ions, and reduced to map specks in Fayettevil­le, Little Rock and three or four Delta counties with heavy Black population. Hopeless, in other words.

Now, to the fuller context: What I’ve taken note of is regional stereotype, not specific policy or leadership style, which remains to be defined.

There were a couple of positive sentences in the Thursday report printed in the Democrat-Gazette, from The New York Times and The Associated Press, of these Democratic changes.

One sentence noted that, amid the Democrat unanimity, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez complained that her party had missed a chance for needed open debate on what the generation­al changes will mean in terms of policy direction.

The effective message of youth and diversity would be dwarfed, or at least offset, by a signal of becoming more liberal.

The best things Democrats have going for them in a full national context is a delicately balanced combinatio­n — their own generation­al appeal and diversity spurring progressiv­e turnout in the urban Democratic stronghold­s while the Republican extremism drives swing voters to Democrats who are seen in places like greater Atlanta and greater Phoenix as more sane and responsibl­e.

That’s the careful two-step that Democrats require — to be modern and changing, but safer even in newness and change than these Republican­s challengin­g American elections and finding Kevin McCarthy somehow too reasonable.

In that regard, there was a singular encouragin­g sentence in that article Thursday, going as follows: “Jeffries has sometimes been met with skepticism from party progressiv­es, viewed as a more centrist figure among House Democrats.”

For an old white-male left-leaner in an abandoned remote province writing a widely unread newspaper column, singular encouragin­g sentences from The New York Times and AP are about the best to be hoped for.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States