Say Anything Blog

As you may or may not know, self-proclaimed “Blue Dog Democrats” are a coalition of Democrat legislators in Washington D.C. who claim to adhere to the principles of fiscal conservatism and balanced budgets.  From their website:

Blue Dog Coalition proposals have served as middle-ground markers which laid the foundation for the bipartisanship necessary to bring about fundamental reforms, and helped set into law policies reflecting the “common sense, conservative compassion” so often attached to the group’s efforts.

In the 110h Congress, the Coalition intends to continue to make a difference in Congress by forging middle-ground, bipartisan answers to the current challenges facing the Country. A top priority will be to refocus Congress on balancing the budget and ridding taxpayers of the burden the debt places on them. The group also expects to be involved in a variety of issues, where the stale extreme left vs. right approach requires a breath of fresh air.

Unfortunately for those of us who are actually concerned about fiscal responsibility and cutting spending, the Blue Dogs seem to be all bark and no bite.  From the Wall Street Journal:

So far this year the blue dogs have been almost all bark when it comes to fiscal restraint and debt reduction. Thirty of the 48 have voted for every one of the non-defense spending bills their committee chairman have sent them. Speaker Nancy Pelosi is enforcing party discipline, and as a result 28 of the 48 blue dogs voted “no” on each of the 27 amendments that Republicans proposed to cut the costs of these bills. The 13 freshman Democrats who represent conservative districts—such as Heath Shuler (N.C.), Baron Hill (Ind.), Zack Space (Ohio), Nick Lampson (Texas)—have been a particular disappointment; back home these same blue dogs trumpet their “independent streak.”

Voting records from recent years confirm that the blue dogs are less than consistent spending hawks. The National Taxpayers Union did some checking and found that the blue dogs had an average fiscal score of 24 out of 100, earning them a grade of D as a group. It also found that last year the blue dogs sponsored $145 of new spending for every dollar of budget reductions, for a net spending increase per member of more than $140 billion.

The blue dogs are consistent on one fiscal issue: stopping tax cuts. As a group they opposed the Bush tax cuts and the extension of those tax cuts, and a super-majority vote requirement to raise taxes—all in the name of easing the debt burden on future generations. But those concerns evaporated when all but nine in the blue dog coalition voted to expand the Schip health-care program to include many middle-class families, at a cost of $132.6 billion over the 2008-2017 period.

To put it simply: Blue Dog Democrats consistently vote in favor of raising spending and against cutting taxes.

So much for their fiscal restraint.

In reality, what the Blue Dog Democrats are is a cover group intended to help liberal politicians from red states, like Rep. Earl Pomeroy who hails from my home state, convince their constituents that they aren’t like the big-government, tax-and-spend types from California or Massachusetts.  It lets them pay lip service to the principles of fiscal restraint and low taxes and campaign on those things without actually having to support them.

Unfortunately, being a fiscal conservative means more than just laying claim to that label.  You must do more than talk.  You must actually oppose spending increases, support spending cuts and vote in favor of lower taxes.  Otherwise you’re just lying to yourself and your supporters.