See another rendition of the study, which finds that women are more effective lawmakers, HERE.

Help combat Fox and Friends’ bigotry! Join the MYD Women’s Issues Committee by emailing Heather at women@gomyd.com.

Hat tip: Women’s Campaign Forum

House Democrats just handily re-elected Rep. Nancy Pelosi to their top spot, and averted a contested election for House Minority Whip by creating an extra leadership position. Senate Democrats are re-electing Harry Reid as majority leader, with Dick Durbin staying on as Majority Whip and Chuck Schumer still in the number three spot as caucus vice chair, although apparently he will have an expanded role overseeing the Senate majority’s communications and policy shop.

Look. I’m not passing judgment here on any of these leaders in particular — but let’s take a moment and remember that we got whupped this cycle. There are a lot of explanations for why, but the easiest one is that our leaders did not deliver results. Yes, the Great Recession would have been worse without the stimulus plans the Democrats passed, but the stimulus that did pass was fairly weak tea. We know we could have and should have done better. Healthcare reform was incredibly watered-down, to the point that the bill we passed does not resemble the benefit package voters were promised, won’t take effect for years, and was impossible to explain in a positive way. We let the opportunity for a new New Deal slip through our fingers.

Instead of avoiding internal fights at all costs, shouldn’t we be having the fights we need to have to figure out what direction we want to go in next?

With all of the pundits talking about how voters just sent a message to Washington that they’re not happy with the results, it’s kind of impressive that in both houses of congress and on both sides of the aisle, the leadership is pretty much exactly the same.

Also, check out Wonkette on this subject.

From The Nation via Democratic Strategist (click here for the full post) :

The period after an election is not set aside for rearranging furniture; Congress sits for two years, not twenty-two months, and it’s supposed to do its job for the entire term. That doesn’t mean Democrats should be blind to the election results; to the contrary, they should respond to them–while getting things done for the American people….

…Pelosi is smart to link the defense of healthcare reform, financial regulation and long-term commitments to maintaining Social Security with the need to create jobs. She can highlight the linkage during the lame-duck session by focusing on fundamentals: extending unemployment benefits, shoring up Medicare and Medicaid, and assuring that a stopgap spending bill contains funding not just to keep the federal government operating into the next year but to help state and local governments and school districts across the country do the same. These are all popular initiatives; Pelosi and Harry Reid–who still controls the Senate for the next two years–have no reason to accept the conventional wisdom that the election produced a mandate for conservative ideas, neglecting the plight of jobless Americans, cutting social services or forcing teacher layoffs in the middle of the school year.

…Democrats should take the moment to argue for letting the Bush tax cuts expire and using the new revenue to maintain federal, state and local services in tough economic times…If compromise is necessary, the only credible one is giving relief to working families–not billionaires. The American people will get the point if Democrats make it aggressively and without apology.

To get movement on this and other priorities like the DREAM Act and DADT even close to being considered for a vote its going to take the mobilization of grassroots organization nationwide. And even if we still can’t get all our goals achieved now, we can fight like we did when we were last in the minority. So get up, brush the midterms off and get ready to be activists once again because 2011 is an excellent opportunity to concentrate on issues rather than elections. With my bullhorn in hand all I have to say is – Game on folks!

.

Explanation of the generic ballot and relationship to predicting midterms:

Throughout the election season, the Pew Research Center and other major polling organizations report a measure that political insiders sometimes call “the generic ballot.” This measure is the percentage of voters in national surveys who say they intend to vote for either the Republican or the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in their district.*

*(If the elections for U.S. Congress were being held today, would you vote for the Republican Party’s candidate or the Democratic Party’s candidate for Congress in your district?)

There is no national election for Congress, of course; rather, 435 individual races determine the composition of the House. So while it might seem that the generic ballot is too broad a measure to forecast the outcome, it has proven to be an accurate predictor of the partisan distribution of the national vote.

The final forecast of the generic House vote and the actual vote totals have paralleled each other very closely for nearly a half-century in U.S. elections. The average prediction error in off-year elections since 1954 has been 1.1%. The lines plotting the actual vote against the final poll-based forecast vote by Gallup and the Pew Research Center track almost perfectly over time.

TPM Poll Tracker – US Congressional Generic Ballot

Pew Research Center

This aid package is a relief for school districts that have been hit hard by decreasing tax revenues due to a poor economy. Sacrifices have been the norm among administrators forced to cut bus routes, reduce educational programming and even shorten their school years. The saving of an estimated 160,000 teachers nation-wide is a small comfort to places like our home state New York, which is expected to receive $622 million or 8,200 jobs.

(To see how many teacher jobs will be saved state by state click here)

Rep. David R. Obey, the legislation’s champion in Congress, made headlines when he proposed covering the bill’s cost by diverting money from President Obama’s education reform initiatives, best described the intentions of this spending bill:

“We do the country no favors if we allow the weakness of the economy to strip qualified teachers from our schools, which in turn would result in exploding class sizes and a decline in educational opportunities for children,”

Despite the many positives, Ed Weekly cites that the caveats attached to making this happen came at the expense of other promising programs including improved access to educational opportunities, combating illiteracy among adults and funding more teacher training. This bill also became the catalyst for a showdown between the White House and legislators after President Obama threatened to veto any bill that would mean cuts to federal grant programs like Race To The Top or the Investment in Innovation Fund.

Regardless of those disagreements, public support from groups like the National Governors Association insure that states will overwhelmingly welcome this support during a period of fiscal crisis — and only weeks away from the beginning of a fall semester in which funding questions will almost certainly continue to creep up.

Hot on the heels of a thwarted terrorist attempt in NYC, you probably thought that it took a diabolical genius just to get the equipment necessary. You thought wrong.

Current federal law specifies only a limited number of reasons the government can cite to block the purchase of guns or explosives — and being in the FBI’s database of those “known or reasonably suspected of being involved in terrorist activity” isn’t one of them.

Can’t believe it? Take a gander.

Senator Bayh

U.S. Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, a centrist Dem, announced he will not seek a third term yesterday. On the heels of the loss of the Kennedy seat in Massachusetts, the news sent Dems “reeling” — but the real story is why he’s quitting when he could pretty easily win re-election. His announcement offers a depressing insider’s perspective on just how dysfunctional Congress has become:

“For some time, I have had a growing conviction that Congress is not operating as it should,” Mr. Bayh said. “There is too much partisanship and not enough progress — too much narrow ideology and not enough practical problem-solving. Even at a time of enormous challenge, the people’s business is not being done.”

“This is colored by having observed the Senate in my father’s day,” Mr. Bayh said. “It wasn’t perfect; they had politics back then, too. But there was much more friendship across the aisles, and there was a greater willingness to put politics aside for the welfare of the country. I just don’t see that now.”

“In my father’s day, you legislated for four years and campaigned for two; now it’s full time. The politics never stops,” he said. “My bottom line is that there are a lot of really good people trapped in a dysfunctional system desperately in need of reform.”

But to New Yorkers, legislative paralysis is nothing new. Come to our General Meeting tonight to hear our President Taylor Stirek speak about the dysfunction in Albany — and what we as MYDers are going to do about it in 2010.

See you at 461 Park Ave S, New York, New York, NY 10016 @ 7PM! map

Times – Democrats Reel as Senator Says No to 3rd Term

Oh, to be China for a Day.

When I picked up my newspaper this morning, I was met by a startling front page headline: “Permanent political martial law is the only viable answer to the climate catastrophe”.

The headline belonged to the Danish newspaper Information which today released a mock issue from the year 2059. Combining humor and horror, the issue was written as if the upcoming Copenhagen Climate Conference (COP15) had been a failure 50 years earlier.

The Problem with Democracy

The funny (or tragic) thing is that the headline is not all that farfetched. If you remove the word ‘permanent’, it runs close to Thomas Friedman’s dream of being “China for a day”. The idea is that at least totalitarian politicians can get painful legislation passed. Democratic politicians often fail due to political self-preservation. We have seen that failure for many years in the climate debate, most notoriously with the U.S. Congress’ rebuke of the Kyoto agreement in 1997.

A strong climate bill can be painful in the short-term, especially in some areas. If you come out in favor of green energy as a congressman of say, Wyoming, don’t count on getting re-elected. So instead, you look out for your own: “The Maldives might sink, but damn if I’m gonna lose my re-election. Let’s burn some coal!”

This is a fundamental problem with protectionist democracies; they are based on the failed notion that the common good is equal to the shared sum of everyone’s self-interest.

State of Denial

In effect, we primarily care about that which tangibly affects our own lives. Fuel prices are tangible. Global warming isn’t. That is – it won’t be until prices skyrocket on third world products and displacement of resources fuels another 9/11 — too bad we have to learn the hard way.

Health care and the regulatory reform are more tangible. “I want to go to the hospital. I want our nation’s banking system to work so I can get a mortgage.” The reforms will keep politicians busy until after COP15 in December. In other words: no climate bill.

When Copenhagen Fails

As a result, Todd Stern, the US Special Envoy for Climate Change will arrive in Copenhagen with no congressional mandate – just like Clinton did. Without US backing, COP15 will at best kick the can down the road. At worst, it will stifle the climate debate by passing an inadequate agreement. Either way, COP15 will fail.

At some point, congressional politicians need to put long-term goals ahead of short-term politics. They must pass the painful legislation, even if it goes against the will of their constituents and infringes on our personal freedoms. In other words, they must act a little more like China.

Of course it would be political suicide. But martial law may be the only answer to avoid a climate catastrophe.

Niolai is MYD’s foreign correspondent. He’s conveniently located in Copenhagen and will be reporting on the lead-up to COP15 and give us an on-the-ground perspective to what’s going on at the world’s most important climate change negotiations since Kyoto.

Interested in Foreign Affairs? Join the Issue Committee!