Anyone Want to See What the Hostile Takeover of the Democratic Party Looks Like?
The post is short and to the point. A link to an invitation to a June, 2007 “retreat” sponsored by the New Democrat Coalition. Obviously David looks at the larger picture of the emergence of a new “Corporate Democratic” Party. My interest, however, lies a bit closer to home.
The retreat, held on Chesapeake Bay was attended by 19 “New Democrat” congress members. Three of those members were from our own Washington State; one from my own congressional district. Retreating with PAC Chair, Adam Smith (D-WA9) were Rep. Brian Baird (D-WA3) and Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA2).
The retreat featured break-outs on such vital issues as:
Breaking the Log Jam on Trade Policy
Health Care: A Competitiveness Issue
Energy Independence and Security ( with an introduction by my own congressman, Rick Larsen)
Oh, did I mention the “NewDem Pac Supporters and Friends Attending the Retreat”?
Josh Ackil, Information Technology Industry
Brian Adkins, Embarq
Cory Alexander, Fannie Mae
Edward An, Time Warner
Zak Andersen, Burlington Northern Santa Fe
Bruce Andrews, Ford
Amy Andryszak, AT&T
Rob Atkinson, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
Don Auerbach, Investment Company Institute
Shane Austin, St. Paul Travelers
Matt Bai, The New York Times Magazine
Peter Begans, Medco
Ricardo Bernal, Washington Group International
Rachelle Bernstecker, American Seniors Housing Association
Victoria Blatter, Merck
Holly Bode, UnitedHealth Group
Jim Bonham, Brown Rudnick
Lyndon Boozer, AT&T
Tammy Boyd, Johnson & Johnson
Marshall Brachman, Washington, DC
Chuck Brain, Capitol Hill Strategies
Paul Brathwaite, The Podesta Group
Alix Burns, Bay Bridge Strategies
Sean Callinicos, Sanofi Pasteur
Melika Carroll, Micron
Rick Carter, PG&E
David Castagnetti, Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti
Jennifer Cetta, T-Mobile
Allen Chew, Credit Union National Association
Jeff Cohen, Federation of American Hospitals
Jason Cole, UBS
Jeff Connaughton, Quinn Gillespie & Associates
David Conover, David Conover and Associates
Sara Conrad, The Conrad Group
Megan Cundari, American Hospital Association
Hon. Jim Davis, Holland and Knight
Priya Dayananda, KPMG
Jeanne Delgado, National Multi Housing Council
Lisa Dinackus, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Gloria Dittus, Dittus Communications
Andy Dodson, Bockorny Group
Julie Domenick, Multiple Strategies
Sean Donohue, Eli Lilly and Company
Jennifer Dowling, NVCA
David Drake, Novartis
Maurie Dugger, Edison Electric Institute
Emily Duncan, Exelon Corporation
Marty Durbin, American Chemistry Council
Renee Eastman, Salt River Project
Susan Eerdmans, AmerisourceBergen
Langston Emerson, NAREIT
Anne Fabry, Brown Rudnick
Pete Filon, Comcast
Alex Flint, Nuclear Energy Institute
Claude Fontheim, Fontheim International
Elizabeth Fox, AFLAC
Monique Frazier, HSBC North America
Shawn Gallagher, AIG
Matt Gelman, Microsoft
Robert Getzoff, Citi
David Gilbert, Constellation Energy Group
Mary Gordon, Nortel
Jamie Gregory, National Association of Realtors
Robert Griner, J.P. Morgan Chase
Tony Hadley, Experian Information Solutions
Bryant Hall, PhRMA
Rob Hall, INVISTA
Sherry Harper, O'Connor & Hannan
Jim Hart, Investment Company Institute
Edward Hill, Bank of America
Janet Howard, MetLife
Mark Irion, Dutko Worldwide
Andy Izquierdo, AstraZeneca<BR>
Bryan Jacobs, Home Depot
Leo Jardot, Wyeth
Kent Jeffreys, International Council of Shopping Centers
Timothy Jenkins, O'Connor & Hannan
Chris Jennings, Jennings Policy Strategies
Broderick Johnson, Bryan Cave Strategies
Charlie Johnson, Akin Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld
Kirsten Johnson-Obey, Freddie Mac
Jonathan Jones, Johnson, Madigan, Peck
Eli Joseph, BIO
Mark Kadesh, Bartlett, Bendall & Kadesh
Hon. Mickey Kantor, Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw
Andrew Kauders, Podesta Group
Tim Keating, Honeywell
Thomas Koonce, IIABA
Lisa Kountoupes, Clark & Weinstock
Leslie Kramerich, Investment Companies Institute
Kristin Krause, FedEx
John Lapp, McMahon, Squier, Lapp & Associates
Peter Lawson, U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Vera LeBrun Grill, Pfizer
Eileen Lee, National Multi Housing Council
Edmund Lee, AIG
Lynn LeMaster, Edison Electric Institute
Ken Levinson, Fontheim International
Andy Lewin, Zurich
Nick Lewis, UPS
Brooke Lundquist, Dow
Jennifer Luray, Abbott Laboratories
Steve McBee, McBee Strategies
Chris McCannell, Quinn Gillespie & Associates
Jesse McCollum, NBWA
Jacqueline McCrocklin, VerizonWireless
Hon. Dave McCurdy, Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers
Sara Mead, Education Sector
Buddy Menn, BI Pharmaceuticals
Rachel Miller, BP
Nancy Mills, AFL-CIO
Peter Molinaro, Dow Chemicals
Howard Moon, Amgen
Cynthia Morton, American Health Care Association
Peter Muller, Genentech
Patrick Murphy, mCapitol
Charles Nau, Johnson & Johnson
Steve Nousen, NEA
Cathy Nyce, State Farm
Manny Ortiz, Quinn Gillespie & Associates
Ellen Pao, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers
Dean Pappas, Allstate
Scott Parven, Parven, Pomper, Schuyler
Chris Payne, Prudential
Theresa Peterson, GE
John Plaza, Imperium Renewables and Seattle Biodiesel
Bob Pozen, MFS
John Prible, IIABA
Kate Prible, PCI
Ann Pride, Entergy
Tim Punke, Monument Policy Group
Christine Ramsdell, Boeing Corporation
Renée Rappaport, Mortgage Bankers Association
Kevin Richards, Symantec
Josh Richman, Bloom Energy
Lucia Riddle, Principal Financial Group
Angela Riemer, Wyeth
Jay Rosenblum, Ernst & Young
Peter Rubin, Merck
Barbara Sacks, Verizon
Melissa Schulman, Bockorny Group
Elizabeth Schwartz, Boeing Corporation
Jill Showell, PMI Group
Courtney Sigmon, The Conrad Group
Hannah Simone, Nuclear Energy Institute
Kelly Slone, NVCA
Peter Slone, Medtronic
Dale Snape, Wexler & Walker
Thomas Spulak, King & Spalding
KR Sridhar, Bloom Energy
Jerry Steffle, Wellpoint
Kristy Sternhell, Hewlett-Packard
Jennifer Stewart, Bryan Cave Strategies
Roslyn Sullivan, PricewaterhouseCoopers
Wendy Sussman, Caremark Rx
Marie Sylla, Verizon
Matthew Tanielian, Cisco<BR>
Dan Tate, Jr. Capitol Solutions
Gordon Taylor, Ogilvy Government Relations
Henry Terhune, Akin Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld
David Thomas, Mehlman Vogel Castagnetti
Jonathan Topodas, Aetna
Andrew Vermilye, Fidelity
Ali Weise, NDN
Robin Weisman, NASDAQ
Allison Weiss, MassMutual
Andrea Wilkinson, Sanofi Pasteur
Adele Witenstein, Abbott
AJ Wojciak, Blue Cross Blue Shield
Kimberly Woodard, Wal-Mart
Duane Wright, America's Health Insurance Plans
It’s a good thing Democrats are immune from lobbyists. (If you're wondering, that would be about 7.5 lobbyists per congress member.)
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
20 comments:
Well Hell Chad,
I think I am just gonna take all my toys and go home!
Roflmao!
How do you fight this level of bribery and corruption when they do it in your face!
Removed those last ones because of typos. :)
Anyway, isn't it great that the business community is reaching out to our party? Yay!!! We boycott them for not supporting us, so there's no way in h*e*double*hockey*sticks I'm going to blast them for talking to us. But then, I get it.
Ozy, if you have proof of bribery you should report it to the Justice Department. Otherwise...hard to take the charge seriously. Meeting with business leaders to discuss their concern in a forum partially sponsored by those businesses is hardly bribery.
Jeez, no wonder conservatives think we're all a bunch of communists. It's extremely naive to believe that all corporations are evil and/or that they get what they want from Democrats just for showing up to events like this.
Chantel please don't be Naive' Lobbying is bribery no matter how you try and spin it. Please enlighten me as to exactly what your opinion of a business concern really is.” a forum partially sponsored by those businesses is hardly bribery." Please!
It's a paid business platform for businesses to get the ear of congressional representatives. These are the same company's who try to bust any organized labor or collective bargaining they can. You talk about them as if they are partners of the public or something.
All of these high paid lobbyists are sent to the retreats to offer financial support for campaigns and special interests of the congress. (bribery)
They are reaching for something other than what’s best for the public it's what’s best for the bottom line of a corporation!
Chantel you try to legitimize the republican propagandist myth by saying "no wonder conservatives think we're all a bunch of communists" I don’t give a Sh*T what these lying Neocons accuse us of. I won’t fall into that trap like some of the lesser thinking dems. It’s their game plan to sucker the public. It always has been.
Another thing Chantel I am far from “extremely naïve” about too much. I have been on both sides of the fence looking in every direction. I have had some experience labor matters, which many Americans haven’t. What I know for sure is that is if you are not carefully skeptical these days you are going to get screwed. The big question will be just who will be screwing you.
You might want to reassess who is being naïve here.
Oh here’s a little excerpt from just one of the thousands of stories out there.
"President Bush and congressional Republican leaders in recent years seemed to have adopted a one-word strategy for governing-- BRIBERY. In essence they’ve said to the voters-- 'we've got money, you've got votes-- let's talk.' But the House Republicans who today selected John Boehner and Roy Blunt as their leaders clearly haven’t gotten the message that the voters sent them on November 7: We will not reward Republicans who engage in bribery, expand government, and ignore social issues.
"Boehner and Blunt's close ties to big government lobbyists indicate that the Republican Party will continue to represent Corporate America over the interests of Main Street America."
TTFN and have a nice day.
Sorry, Ozy - you're wrong on this one. It is extremely naive for you to call lobbying the same as bribery. They are very different. Whenever you talk to an elected about your concerns, you're lobbying. These businesses employ thousands of people, many of them union. They want to talk to our Democrats about issues? Listening to them is not bribery - it's good government.
Democrats don't let business write legislation like Republicans do, but Dems do listen to their concerns. You are, in fact, naive if you believe Dems should not do so. It's one of those things that come with governing...oh wait, you don't want to actually govern. I forgot that you're primarily interested in 'making a point' and 'sending a message', so the reality of governing doesn't concern you. My mistake.
Chantel,
Just to be clear – you are equating the wining and dining of elected officials by the pharmaceutical industry’s biggest lobbying firms as ”…the business community is reaching out to our party…”?
One of the break-out sessions for the day:
Health Care: A Competitiveness Issue
In attendance
*Peter Begans, Medco
*Victoria Blatter and Peter Rubin, Merck
*Tammy Boyd and Charles Nau, Johnson & Johnson
*Sean Callinicos and Andrea Wilkinson, Sanofi Pasteur
*Sean Donohue, Eli Lilly and Company
*David Drake, Novartis
*Marty Durbin, American Chemistry Council
*Andy Izquierdo, AstraZeneca
*Leo Jardot and Angela Riemer, Wyeth
*Vera LeBrun Grill, Pfizer
*Jennifer Luray and Adele Witenstein, Abbott Laboratories
*Peter Molinaro and Brooke Lundquist, Dow Chemicals
*Peter Muller, Genentech
And the beat(ing) goes on………. Let's face it. The only competition going on here is the consumer versus the big pharmaceutical lobby - and I don't recall my invitation to the "retreat."
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Chad -
To be clear: I'll worry when these companies STOP talking to Democrats. We WANT to exchange ideas with them given the numbers of people they employ and the lives they impact...don't we??
Now if you have solid evidence that Democrats are allowing industry to write legislation for quid pro quo, as Republicans did, then please bring it forward. Otherwise you're simply playing a 'guilt by association' game that is - frankly - beneath you from what I've read.
I know I'm just a girl and couldn't possibly understand the simple concept of 'meeting with corporate representatives is the same as bribery and means our democracy is for sale', but I guess I'm just an airhead that way. I don't see conspiracies everywhere I turn...maybe I'm just blonde... *sigh*
Chantel,
You sure are good. It's hard to believe that you haven't been scooped up to be on somebody's congressional staff yet.
If I thought for a moment that the lobbyists for the pharmaceutical companies had the best interest of the American people at heart, I would be all for them. The fact is that it has been the influence ($$$) peddled by these very people that has been at the heart of the healthcare crisis in this country for years. During the past 10 years the Republicans have been in the majority in Congress and so the lobby money went to them. Now it is the Democrats' turn. As witnessed by this turnout at a "New Democrat" retreat, it appears that the rats have simply moved onboard a new ship.
The credo of the "New Democrat" has been - "If it's good for business, it's good for us..er we mean US" One only needs to witness the eagerness with which they trade American jobs away (I have lost two myself) and the draconian bankruptcy laws they (Baird and Larsen) saddled the American consumer with for the benefit of the credit card industry and other business interests.
You are more than welcome to parrot the DLC mantra but I still believe in the Democratic Party Platform that puts working people over Big Business.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
Chantel Of course I am not wrong but obviously It will be impossible to get through to you so I guess it's pointless. You make accusations about me like "I forgot that you're primarily interested in 'making a point' and 'sending a message', so the reality of governing doesn't concern you." which are just silly but if thats how you try to debate an issue let it be so. It just strengthens my points.
Of course you are wrong again and again and here's a gem you just stepped in "Democrats don't let business write legislation like Republicans do,"
Democrats do let businesses write legislation all the time.Here's just one Point IN FACT! The bankruptcy bill they helped the republicans to pass.
That was a joint effort by the pukes and sell out Dems to pander to the credit card industry.
That bill is awful and was written buy guess who...The Lobbyists. Yes Chantel another case where you are out of touch with facts.
Have a great day.
Er, the bankruptcy bill was written in a GOP congress. You're just still on about Dems who voted for it (and against your position), which makes it a rant, not a point. Now if you can show me evidence that an industry has authored a bill since November of 2006, then I'm happy to listen.
And Chad, your point is still predicated on "corporations bad". Forgive me for disagreeing with you on that one. And you are hardly an "old school Democrat". Our party hated monopolies like Standard Oil, but has never been anti-corporate. That's a fairly new wrinkle.
Hmph. I'll take your suggestion that I should find congressional employment as a compliment (though you probably didn't mean it that way, because all congress people are evil destroyers of the proletariat of course), but I'm far too shy for anything like that. As for corporations being concerned about profit, well, duh. The whole idea is that they profit, they grow, they employ people, and regulation keeps them from getting out of hand.
I have a difficult time with the 'corporations are evil' line, because it's far too general. Also, given the numbers of people they employ and their diverse interests, they deserve to be listened to. That's all I'm saying.
Chantel,
With all due respect, there are days when your comments border on trolling.
"Er, the bankruptcy bill was written in a GOP congress. You're just still on about Dems who voted for it (and against your position), which makes it a rant, not a point...." OK, the Republicans are "the enemy"...'are bad'...'are the ones to blame'. What does that say about the Democrats who side with them against the average consumer and the overwhemling majority of the Democratic caucus and party?
"And Chad, your point is still predicated on "corporations bad"." No. Wrong again! Nowhere have I said "corporations bad." What I have said is that industry lobbyists have the average American at a distinct and unfair disadvantage when it comes to access to and leverage with members of Congress. You may argue til you're red in the face that this only applies to Republicans but you insult your audience with that type of rhetoric.
Democrats cannot stand on the floor of the congress and decry the effect of the pharmaceutical industry lobbyists on healthcare legislation when the Republicans are in charge and then happily take their money when they have the power.
Finally, your continual Rovian tactic of baseless claims against your oppopnents in debate, (ie. insinuating that Ozy is ..."primarily interested in 'making a point' and 'sending a message', so the reality of governing doesn't concern you." or your repeated claims of name calling when none exists, are becoming quite old.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
I assure you that trolling is not my intent, but I cannot apologize for defending the Democratic party from attack - whether that attack comes from fundamentalist religious righties or fundamentalist so-called 'progressive' lefties. There is nothing inherently evil about meeting with corporate lobbyists, and your saying otherwise doesn't make it so.
The issue I have is that you simply list the names of those who were present and the companies they represent as if that in itself serves as some kind of indictment or proof of something. And what does it really prove? That Democrats met with some business representatives. That's what it proves.
If your definition of 'trolling' is disagreeing with your ad hominem attacks on the Democratic party and your insinuation that they are doing some kind of quid pro quo, then I suppose you may consider me as much a troll here as I would be on Free Republic saying the exact same thing. And that, Mr. Shue, is a shame.
Yay! I just called and left a message for my representative about my feelings on the Makah. I guess I must be some kind of privileged insider with special access! :)
"Chantel you try to legitimize the republican propagandist myth"
"All of these high paid lobbyists are sent to the retreats to offer financial support for campaigns and special interests of the congress. (bribery"
"You sure are good. It's hard to believe that you haven't been scooped up to be on somebody's congressional staff yet."
"You are more than welcome to parrot the DLC mantra"
"you insult your audience"
"Finally, your continual Rovian tactic of baseless claims against your oppopnents in debate...or your repeated claims of name calling when none exists, are becoming quite old."
Yeah, I should watch that name-calling stuff. We wouldn't want that in a civil debate. Come on, Chad. Cut a centrist Dem a break. All I'm saying is that the claims 'bribery' are a bit overblown for what was essentially a meeting with business leaders and that it's good for Democrats to do so given that these interests have traditionally been on the opposing side of us. If that makes me some kind of troll, then wow.
OK Here's a thought that we may be able to reach some kind of common ground. To compare me or some other Democrats to the Ultra right wingnuts is a bit insulting but it is your right I guess.
Chantel I honestly go with many progressives out there far more then the self proclaimed centrist Dems.
Among this group are a few names of folks who I have had the pleasure of discussion. Some more than others obviously.=)
Thom Hartmann, Randi Rhodes, Mike and Kathy Malloy. No real in depth stuff mainly some emails and brief chats on their shows but it seems we are on the same page for the most part. Bernie Ward in California. Peter Werbe another progressive talker. I have spoke in depth with state and local officials. Rick Larsen, Maria Cantwell. These two in a particularly controlled forum.
My local Central Democratic Committee. I am headed there now.
I am running for LD chair next year and its looking good. So not to get to embattled with you on the issues. We all support the Democratic platform and some of us want to see some positive changes. As long as you put forth your opinions on the matter I will do my best to offer mine. Please don't ever compare me or some of our Democratic brothers and sisters with the enemy. We know who they are and it's rough to maintain our composure when we beat the hell out of each other on some of these points of disagreement.
Have a nice night =)
I am off to promote Democratic values.
LOL
Do you think Brian Baird got this letter?
Dear Ozy
Yesterday, General David Petraeus and Iraq Ambassador Ryan Crocker appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to deliver their report on the war in Iraq. It was a very somber hearing, and I did my best to convey our strong opposition to the President's war in Iraq.
To hear General Petraeus tell it, you'd think things were on the right track. But let's face facts: This has been the bloodiest summer for U.S. forces in Iraq since the war began -- and despite the hard work and sacrifices of our brave men and women in uniform, the Iraqi government has met only 3 of the 18 benchmarks that they agreed to over a year ago.
This war is the biggest foreign policy mistake ever. President Bush took our nation's eye off defeating the terrorists, led by Osama bin Laden, who killed thousands of Americans six years ago. We have lost thousands of American lives, thousands more have been wounded, and our military and our national guard and their families are being strained to the breaking point.
It's time for President Bush and General Petraeus to take off their rose-colored glasses. Once again, they tell us that everything is going well, but a recent BBC/ABC News poll showed that 79% of Iraqis oppose the presence of American troops in Iraq, and 70% of Iraqis think that President Bush's "surge" has made them less secure.
As General Petraeus told the Boston Globe in November 2003, "We want to be seen as an army of liberation and not an army of occupation...There is a half-life on our role here, you wear out your welcome at some point. It doesn't matter how helpful you are. We aren't here to stay."
It's time for President Bush, Congress, and General Petraeus to heed those wise words.
We are sending our troops into a country where they're not wanted, into the middle of a civil war, into the middle of the mother of all foreign policy mistakes, with no end in sight.
Next week, the Senate will have another chance to begin bringing our troops home. I'm going to continue fighting as hard as I can to end the war -- and I'll be asking for your help to do just that. Stay tuned.
No more rose-colored glasses. We must end this war.
In Friendship,
Barbara Boxer
U.S. Senator
P.S. To read more news coverage of yesterday's hearing, visit www.BarbaraBoxer.com.
Well said, Ozy. Just as you dislike being compared to the enemy, so do I hate when our sitting elected Dems are so compared. That being said...thanks for the discussion. :~)
Chantel,
You may twist things any way you like but simply pointing out a tactic or rhetoric style is not name calling. On the other hand, some of the names that you seem to love to throw about:
* "Before we go any further, here' s a little discussion of topics near and dear to the hearts of the far lefty fringe..."
*"Note to Kookcitizens: You are not the party base."
And my personal favorite:
*"Jean, you arrogant schmuck!"
Now I will try (probably in vain) one last time to explain that the "retreat" was for Members of Congress - in particular, "New Dems" to hear from their peers and industry experts on selected topics during designated break-out sessions. The people that I named in my post are industry lobbyists who paid significant funds to attend the retreat for the specific purpose of influencing these same Members of Congress. They were not "business leaders" or even business owners. They were paid lobbyists. They were not presenters. Their purpose in life is to attempt to influence the votes of Members of Congress.
Peace,
Chad (The Left Shue)
Yes Chad. And your subpoint seems to be that because these folks went to the meeting that obviously they'll cave and give those lobbyists everything they want. To which I say really? And your evidence is????
As for the posts I've made on my blog, it's called a 'sense of humor'...with a dash of truth in there as well. Kucinich supporters were still saying he could win at the convention in 2004 even after he released his delegates to vote for Kerry. If sanity is defined as a measure of one's grasp on reality, then "Kookcitizens" is fairly apt.
I suppose the insults only go one way, though. Bribe-takers, sell-outs, etc is fine, but "kookcitizens" is out of line. And you have not yet chosen to respond to my point that you are blasting me for saying things I'd be equally blasted for saying over on Free Republic.
Know why? 'Cause extremism is as extremism does.
Post a Comment