A lot has been written about whether or not the Democratic Party has shifted Left or Right and whether it has ever been as far left as it is now. I’m going to address the latter point in another diary, but I wanted to look at the former point first. I wanted to go back and look at the composition of the Democrats in Congress in 2006 and comparing it to the current 2016 composition. Here are the Democratic Senators and/or Senators who caucused with Democrats in 2006 (From Wikipedia):
Blanche Lincoln (D)
Mark Pryor (D)
Dianne Feinstein (D)
Barbara Boxer (D)
Ken Salazar (D)
Christopher Dodd (D)
Joseph Lieberman (D)
Joe Biden (D)
Tom Carper (D)
Bill Nelson (D)
Daniel Inouye (D)
Daniel Akaka (D)
Richard Durbin (D)
Barack Obama (D)
Evan Bayh (D)
Tom Harkin (D)
Mary Landrieu (D)
Paul Sarbanes (D)
Barbara Mikulski (D)
Ted Kennedy (D)
John Kerry (D)
Carl Levin (D)
Debbie Stabenow (D)
Mark Dayton (DFL)[8]
Max Baucus (D)
Ben Nelson (D)
Harry Reid (D)
Jon Corzine (D), until January 17, 2006 Bob Menendez (D), from January 18, 2006
Frank Lautenberg (D)
Jeff Bingaman (D)
Charles Schumer (D)
Hillary Clinton (D)
Kent Conrad (D)
Byron Dorgan (D)
Ron Wyden (D)
Jack Reed (D)
Tim Johnson (D)
Patrick Leahy (D)
James Jeffords (I)
Patty Murray (D)
Maria Cantwell (D)
Robert Byrd (D)
Jay Rockefeller (D)
Herb Kohl (D)
Russ Feingold (D)
In 2006 there were 43 Democratic Senators with 2 others who caucused with the Democrats. Those two were Mark Dayton who was from the DFL Party in MN (essentially the Democratic Party) and Independent Jim Jeffords of VT. The first thing one should notice is how conservative the Democrats were (the 2004 Democrats were even more so with the likes of Zell Miller, Bob Graham, John Edwards, Fritz Hollings, Tom Daschle and John Breaux). Fully one third of the Democratic Senators in 2006 could be considered Conservative Democrats or what we would consider Blue Dogs. That is Democrats who tended to be more conservative socially, economically and/or on foreign affairs. They would often cross the aisle to vote with the GOP and many would even show up on FOX or some other form of right wing media bashing Dems in one way or another. Joe Lieberman, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, Max Baucus, Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln and Kent Conrad are some examples of these Conservative Democrats. Today, for various reasons, most of them are no longer in office.
The second group of Senators make up another third more or less. They fall into a group who would likely be more aligned with New Democrats (Formerly the DLC Democrats) than Blue Dog Democrats. These tended to be more socially liberal but economically conservative (or neo liberal in some cases) and many were war hawks when it came to foreign policy. These were the Establishment or more mainstream Dems who generally didn’t make waves (like bash Dems on FOX) and on most issues stuck with the Party. They were generally more supportive of Free Trade, market based economic solutions to such things like poverty, education, healthcare and so on. Much like the country they have adapted and changed their position on various social issues and foreign policy issues. John Kerry for example by this time had completely changed his position on the Iraq War. President (then Senator) Barack Obama would eventually change on DOMA and DADT. Diane Feinstein, Joe Biden, Tom Carper, Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Patty Murray, Maria Cantwell, John Corzine are some examples of the Dems who fall into this category.
Finally the third group of Dems were those who would likely be called Progressives. These are Dems who scored 90% or higher on crucial progressive votes over their lifetime (as per ProgressivePunch.org) and stuck with the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party on key votes. They tended to generally be less pro war than their Dem counterparts, more socially and economically liberal as well. Russ Feingold, Jack Reed, Dick Durbin, Tom Harkin, Barbara Boxer, Frank Lautenberg and Pat Leahy would all fall under this category.
So 10 years ago the 45 Democrats in the US Senate were more or less evenly split between right, center and left within the Democratic Party with the center probably coming out slightly ahead (not going into where exactly the Center is/was at this point). In the US House the situation was essentially the same. The Blue Dog Coalition had roughly 40 members in 2006 out of the total 202 Democrats. Ironically this group was named and founded in the 80’s by by a few Democrats (Billy Tauzin, Jimmy Hayes and Pete Geren) who flipped to the Republican Party later on. At that time they believed that the Democratic Party had moved left and in the process left them out in the cold like a pack of dogs. Hence the name Blue Dogs. On the left side of the Democratic tent in 2006 there was the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) which was founded in the early 90’s. The CPC had only slightly more members than the Blue Dog Coalition and included founding members Pete Defazio, Maxine Waters and Bernie Sanders as well as Barney Frank, Jim McDermott, Jerry Nadler, George Miller, Pete Stark, Lynn Woolsey and others. The remaining 100 or so Democratic Representatives fell somewhere in the middle with many being part of the New Democrats or what was the DLC before it folded.
That was the composition of the Democrats in the congress in 2006 heading into the elections. In 2006 we witnessed sort of a great Democratic reawakening. In particular in terms of the Iraq War. In 2004 Kerry got hammered for flip flopping on the Iraq War. But by 2006 the Democratic Party was changing as a whole. Many Dems who ran that year ran against the War. Groups like VoteVets first started sprouting up and in CT a virtual unknown named Ned Lamont single handedly took down the biggest of Democratic war hawks (Joe Lieberman) in the state’s Democratic Primary and won over the netroots with his anti-establishment and anti-war campaign. Unfortunately Joe Lieberman went on to win the November election as an Independent but that would be the last one he would run in and he was the exception, not the rule. Howard Dean pushed a 50 state strategy and the Democratic Party ran against George Bush and the War. The result was the Democrats were swept into the majority in the House AND Senate in November 2006. In the Senate we saw Ben Cardin replace Paul Sarbanes, Amy Klobuchar replace Mark Dayton and Independent Bernie Sanders replace Independent Jim Jeffords. Moderate Democrats Claire McCaskill, Jon Tester, Bob Casey and Jim Webb joined Progressive Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse and Sherrod Brown in the Senate as well. In the House we saw a similar dynamic as Democrats made gains on a wide variety of fronts and had new members from across the political spectrum. Both the Blue Dogs and CPC saw their ranks swell as the Democrats went from 202 seats to 233 seats and former CPC member Nancy Pelosi was elevated to Speaker of the House, a first in our history (Woman and Italian). The House also saw it’s first Muslim member (Keith Ellison) as well as our first Buddhist members (Maize Hirono and Hank Johnson).
So how do we compare today to 2006?
Here are the current 46 Democratic and Independent Senator who caucus with the Democrats:
Dianne Feinstein (D)
Barbara Boxer (D)
Michael Bennet (D)
Richard Blumenthal (D)
Chris Murphy (D)
Tom Carper (D)
Chris Coons (D)
Bill Nelson (D)
Brian Schatz (D)
Mazie Hirono (D)
Dick Durbin (D)
Joe Donnelly (D)
Angus King (I)[note 8]
Barbara Mikulski (D)
Ben Cardin (D)
Elizabeth Warren (D)
Ed Markey (D)
Debbie Stabenow (D)
Gary Peters (D)
Amy Klobuchar (D)
Al Franken (D)
Claire McCaskill (D)
Jon Tester (D)
Harry Reid (D)
Jeanne Shaheen (D)
Bob Menendez (D)
Cory Booker (D)
Tom Udall (D)
Martin Heinrich (D)
Chuck Schumer (D)
Kirsten Gillibrand (D)
Heidi Heitkamp (D)
Sherrod Brown (D)
Ron Wyden (D)
Jeff Merkley (D)
Bob Casey, Jr. (D)
Jack Reed (D)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D)
Patrick Leahy (D)
Bernie Sanders (I)[note 8]
Mark Warner (D)
Tim Kaine (D)
Patty Murray (D)
Maria Cantwell (D)
Joe Manchin (D)
Tammy Baldwin (D)
Essentially almost every Conservative Democrat from 2006 was either wiped out in a primary, retired or lost in a general election since 06. The net result is that Tom Carper, Harry Reid and Bill Nelson who were some of the more moderate of the Conservative Democrats in 2006 are some of the more conservative Dems in 2016. Joe Manchin takes the mantle as the most Conservative Democrat. HOWEVER, he’s to the left of Ben Nelson (most Conservative Democrat in 06) by about 20-25%. Ben Nelson, voted with the Democratic Party roughly half the time, and even less so on crucial Progressive votes. Joe Manchin has a lifetime score of 74% of voting with Dems and a 58% on crucial Progressive votes. Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Donnelly, Claire McCaskill, Independent Angus King, Mark Warner, Tom Carper (holdover from 06), Tom Kaine, Michael Bennet, Jon Tester, Harry Reid (holdover from 06) and Bill Nelson (holdover from 06) round out the top 12 most conservative Dems in the 2016 Senate. In 2006 Bill Nelson was somewhere closer to 20. So we clearly see how much the Democratic Party has shifted left on the right side of the party when we look at Tom Carper, Harry Reid and Bill Nelson and consider that they are now some of the more conservative Dems in the Senate.
On the Progressive side, Dems lost the iconic Ted Kennedy but gained Elizabeth Warren AND Ed Markey. They’re currently the most and third most progressive Democrats in the Senate. Dems also lost Russ Feingold but gained Tammy Baldwin who is the Second most progressive, and we will very likely get Russ BACK in 2017. Dems also lost progressive Tom Harkin to retirement and Frank Lautenberg to his passing away, but as far as NJ is concerned they gained a very surprisingly progressive Cory Booker (fourth most progressive Dem in the Senate). Previously mentioned Maize Hirono who was the first Buddhist elected in the House, became the first Buddhist in the Senate. She also is one of the most progressive Dems in the Senate along with fellow Hawaiian Brian Schaatz. Sherrod Brown, Al Franken, Bernie Sanders, Jeff Merkley, Kirsten Gillebrand (another pleasant surprise), Sheldon Whitehouse, Ben Cardin, Tom Udall, Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy (who replaced the odious Joe Lieberman) all are new members who make up the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party in the Senate. In the process existing progressives like Barbara Boxer, Jack Reed, Dick Durbin and Pat Leahy have all been pushed down as these new Dems are by and large much more progressive than the older stalwarts. The Progressive Democrats now make up almost HALF of the Democratic Senators currently in office and look to expand on that in 2017.
It’s hard not to conclude from this that the Democrats have indeed moved left in the Senate, both on the right flank AND on the left flank. In the House the picture is more stark. The Democrats currently have 188 seats in the House of Representatives, which is 14 less than the Dems had in 2006. After making huge gains in both 2006 and 2008, Dems got wiped out in 2010 and again in 2014. By and large the losses were in the right side of the Democratic tent. The Blue Dog Coalition which saw it’s ranks swell up at one point to about 60 members, currently only have 14 members, for a loss of over 40 members since their high point in 2009 and about 25 or so from 2006. That number is sure to go down even further with the loss of Loretta Sanchez who is running for the Senate seat in CA and Gwen Graham who got redistricted out of her FL seat. Others like Brad Ashford, Henry Cuellar, Kyrsten Sinema, Jim Cooper and Collin Peterson will likely hold on to their seats but are always at risk of losing re-election. Meanwhile the CPC sits at 68 Representatives and 1 non voting Delegate from DC. That represents over 1/3rd of all the Democrats in the House of Representatives. Democrats hope to make gains in the November 2016 elections but it’s very unlikely that the Blue Dogs will ever come close to the 60 members they boasted in 2009-2011.
The reasons for this shift left are many. In the House, gerrymandering has played a part in reducing the number of Moderate Dems while simultaneously increasing Progressive Dems by eliminating Democratic held swing districts and packing Democratic voters in very blue districts where Progressives get elected. Pennsylvania for example went from having 12 Democratic Representatives from across the political spectrum in 2009-2011 to 5 Democratic Representatives today who mostly sit on the left of the political spectrum. The least Democratic leaning district is a D+4 (PA-17) followed by D+12 (PA-13), D+16 (PA-14), D+25 (the insanely gerrymandered PA-1) and D+39 (PA-2). The same dynamic happened in NC, OH, WI, MI and elsewhere where gerrymandering essentially wiped out Moderate Democrats in those states. The 2010 elections saw huge losses on the right of the Democratic side, as many of the Blue Dogs Dems were replaced by Tea Party Republicans. This had the effect of pushing the Democratic Party left while at the same time moving DC to the extreme right. 2014 saw this dynamic played out again. As DC has become more polarized, the representatives in the middle have essentially been all but wiped out and replaced by extremist Tea Party Republicans on the right and Progressives on the left.
In the Senate where gerrymandering does not play a part, the Dems have ridden the rise and fall of presidential year elections to off year elections to move left. In 2008 Dems made huge gains by winning in red/pink states like AK (Mark Begich), NC (Kay Hagan), VA (Mark Warner) as well as more Democratic leaning states like CO, MN, NH, NM and OR. In 2010 Democrats lost key races in Democratic leaning states like IL, MA, PA and WI. They also lost seats held by Conservative Dems in AR, ND and IN. Only by sheer luck did Dems hold onto the majority by beating terrible Tea Party Republicans in NV, DE and CO. In 2012 Democrats again made some gains in blue states like CT (Joe Lieberman retired), ME (Olympia Snowe retired) and MA while gaining a seat in IN and holding tough states like MT, MO, ND, VA and WV. However in 2014, Democratic Senators who won in 2008 in AK, NC and CO got wiped out along with Conservative Dems in AR and LA. Dems also saw Moderates in WV, SD and MT get replaced by Tea Party Republicans and saw Progressive Dem Tom Harkin get replaced by a pig castrator. The rise and fall of the electoral cycle has played as big a part as anything else in shifting the Democrats in the Senate leftward, in large part by wiping out the right flank of the Democratic Party during off year elections. It has also helped solidify the rancorous partisanship of the Senate. Democrats are largely winning bluer states with more progressive candidates and Republicans are winning redder states with more conservative candidates. In 2016, 2018 and 2020 we should see a similar dynamic to what we have seen play out since 2006. In 2016 Dems should compete in more Democratic leaning states they lost in 2010 like WI, IL, NH, PA and even NC while competing in red/pink states. However in 2018, Democrats will likely be hard pressed to hold onto less Democratic friendly seats they won in 2012 like WV, IN, MT, MO and ND. Finally in 2020, Dems should be able to take back those seats in Democratic leaning states like IA, CO and NC that they lost in heartbreaking fashion in 2014. By 2020 we may well be down to single digits for number of states with a split in Senators between Democrats and Republicans. Currently there are 14 states with a Democrat and a Republican senators. Barring an unexpected wave one way or another, this election could reduce that number to as few as 8 with Democrat gains in states like FL, OH, IL, NH, FL and WI. 2018 elections could further reduce that number down if the GOP make expected gains in states like ND, MT, IN, MO or WV. Finally in 2020 Democrats can reduce that number even more by retaking CO.
Politics to a certain extent has also played a role in shifting the Democrats in Congress towards the left. Certainly many Dems were wiped out in 2010 due to depressed turnout on the Democratic side. Same in 2014. The reasons for depressed turnout are varied and range from bad campaigns, bad candidates, sense of betrayal by Dem candidates, non presidential year elections, disinterest by younger voters and so on. Often arguments fall into a chicken/egg debate as to which came first. Was turnout low because of loser candidates or did the candidates lose because of low turnout? Whatever the case may be, the end result has definitely been a shift left politically within the Democratic Party. This has happened as a result of both the right flank being wiped out and simultaneously the left flank growing. The question that remains is has this also shifted policy leftward as well. That will be looked at in another diary.