Walz + FISA = Blue Dog? Not Quite.

Tim Walz is as Tim Walz does (0.00 / 0)

Tim Walz has been perhaps the biggest disappointment of this year's freshman class.  You are quite correct that he is out there talking to his constituents like nobody's business.  But the votes have been quite different than anyone would have expected.

You were very gentle in describing his FISA vote.  Not only did he vote to grant unprecedented powers to the rogue president, not only did he vote for a law whose provisions he apparently hadn't read or didn't understand, not only did he give the imperial president even more than he had asked for...he actually made all that previously illegal wiretapping now legal, in direct violation to the 4th amendment of the Constitution.

Second, Tim Walz had most of us convinced that he would join others in bringing the tragic occupation of Iraq to an end, but he voted (5/24) to give Bush another $100 billion for it.  Walz voted not just for that "benchmark" version that Ellison and others voted for (that Bush vetoed).  He voted (with Peterson) for the real thing with absolutely no conditions.  And Walz did it saying that Bush is such an evil man that Walz was afraid that Bush would leave the troops stranded, starving and without bullets in Iraq if Congress didn't give Bush the money.  I ask you: Is that the sort of Commander in Chief that you would like to give another hundred billion to?

Last, and perhaps worst, Tim Walz had the unique opportunity to stop another war, but he didn't.  On May 17, Congress considered a resolution requiring the president to seek Congressional approval before going to war with Iran.  The power to declare war, after all, is given by the Constitution to Congress.  However Walz, along with most of the House, voted against it.  I have no doubt that Dick Cheney considers that vote a de facto declaration of war against Iran.  And if you don't like the war with Iraq, I can absolutely guarantee that you are going to hate war with Iran.

Don't get me wrong.  I think Tim Walz is a fine person, and he may even turn out to become a good Congressman.  So far, however, he has been a huge disappointment.  Sadly, the world is a somewhat more dangerous place because of some of his votes.

---

by: Charley @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 01:19:02 AM CDT

Overly gentle -- perhaps (0.00 / 0)

You may be right that I'm being overly gentle about the FISA vote, Charley.  But I disagree vehemently that his tenure has been a disappointment on the whole.  His votes on the 100-hour agenda have been right on the money (granted, they were easy votes).  His work on behalf of veterans has been great, and my impressions are that he's been doing pretty well at learning Ag policy on that committee.

Is the FISA vote pretty egregiously wrong?  Yes.  Walz has been hearing it from his constituents, and Jeff Fecke outlined it pretty well here in an opinion piece.  But if the goal is to identify Democrats who need a good primary to remind them of the party to which they belong and the people they represent, Walz is pretty far down that list.  Even with a tough district like the 7th, I would sooner support a primary against Collin Peterson. 

---

by: Joe Bodell @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 08:22:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Where'ya gonna get the money? (0.00 / 0)

I guess it is all in where you think the levers are, Joe.  Of course, you are quite correct about the "easy votes" of the first 100 hours.  Walz did meet expectations on those mostly bread and butter issues.  As for ag policy, I will completely keep my mouth shut since I don't know enough to comment, but my sense is that Tim Walz would generally do his homework and have good instincts on that sort of thing.

But you don't touch either Iraq or Iran in my comment.  At three billion a week, Iraq is obviously eating up any money we would spend on anything for roughly the next generation.  Which leaves some serious questions.  Having spent that money with cash borrowed from China, how are we going to develop sustainable energy alternatives, support sensible ag policy, rebuild infrastructure or actually do anything at all that a forward-thinking government would normally do?

Iran, however, is the question that literally keeps me up at night and wakes me up too early in the morning.  What I hear (from mostly military sources) is that we already have special ops teams shaking things up and identifying targets in Iran (just as we did in Iraq prior to March '03).  Clearly there has been some violence, either by covert US teams or by our surrogates.  If Congress allows Bush to invade Iran, all hell breaks loose.  It then becomes quite clear that the U.S. has targeted countries where Islam predominates.  It becomes clear that the U.S. is supporting the most repressive regimes.  (Witness the most recent massive high-tech arms deal to Israel and Saudi Arabia.)

At that point, the violence that has centered in Iraq (and Afghanistan to some extent) becomes regionalized and then world-wide.  That conflict becomes the true "clash of civilizations" that folks used to talk about a few years ago.  At that point, we restart the draft or spend every single penny in the country on mercenaries.  At that point, the United States starts looking economically like the former Soviet Union, and for much the same reason: that we have spend money we didn't have to pay for war toys that we couldn't afford. 

Now I want to ask you what you think about Tim Walz's vote on letting Bush start a war with Iran, if that's what Cheney tells him to do.  Are you O.K. with that?

---

by: Charley @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 11:27:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Most disappointing Freshman? (0.00 / 0)

I am a constituent of Tim Walz. And frankly, I don't like his FISA or war votes either. But, I don't really care how he rates with other freshmen. He is the Congressperson we have and I am going to stick by him. Our previous rep was a do nothing, follow the president, no original thinking, kind of guy. Walz is the exact opposite.

And to be honest, i see all the polling numbers about what americans think about the war and the president's conduct of it. But I don't know if the numbers in the first congressional District look exactly like those numbers. We just had 2000 troops return to the 1st from Iraq, and I know their well being was heavy on the minds of many here. We all want them home and tim did pledge to work to change course in Iraq. But I know many of his constituents don't want to hang their soldiers out to dry either. And frankly, I don't know that he isn't working to bring them home.

If you wanted a Keith Ellison, bless his soul, from the 1st district you were being unrealistic. Tim is going to be a great leader on many issues of importance to the 1st. And when we have a real chance to end this war I believe Tim will do it. But I can also say because I have personally talked to him at length about it, that that was a very tough vote for him to make.

And to be honest, on the other issues, Tim is actually out in front, leading his district on many issues including worker rights. He could use a little help on health care though.

---

by: JohnLLewis @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 22:01:52 PM CDT

Progressive Punch index (0.00 / 0)

Walz is not a member of the Blue Dog Caucus.

One of the tools recommended by the Open Left's Bush Dog campaign is Progressive Punch a non-partisan searchable
database (http://www.progressi...) of Congressional voting records from a progressive perspective.  It's one way of putting the  votes that Charley draws sole attention to in context with the rest of Walz's record.

Walz's score on all issues is 90.88 and rank among all members:  67/433

By way of comparison, the rest of Minnesota's delegation (the Senators will, of course, be judged by a different set of votes):
Coleman (R)  17.49  55/100
Klobuchar (DFL*)  92.55  13/100 

Bachmann (MN06-R)  1.50  427/433
Ellison (MN05-DFL) 96.42  7/433
Kline (MN02-R)  2.77  405/433
McCollum (MN04-DFL)  92.00  55/433
Oberstar (MN08-DFL)  86.89  127/433
Peterson (MN07-DFL)  59.63  229/433
Ramstad (MNO3-R)  20.65  241/433

What's interesting in that scale is that Walz places third in ranking among Minnesota's U.S. Representatives, and first among reps from districts that include rural or "Greater" Minnesota within their bounds.  Walz's ranking above Oberstar was something of a surprise to me, though Blue Dog Caucus member Collin Peterson's score was not.

Another consideration that the Open Left project raises is the possibility of a more progressive candidate to challenge  Bush Dog incumbents.  There's been no substantive public talk of any Democratic primary challenger in the First on blogs, group lists, newspapers, or letters to the editor, although a scant handful in  newspaper comment sections have mentioned that there *should* be one.

Should one announce, MnCR, Minnesota Monitor, and other Minnesota blogs will surely let everyone know.

*Minnesotan for Democratic party

---

by: Ollie Ox @ Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 11:04:09 AM CDT