Bulo’s 2009 Top 10 MVPs (Most Valuable to the Progressive Cause)
I am El Somnambulo, and I am a listaholic. 2009, IMHO, was a great year for Delaware progressives, maybe the best ever. Both equal rights for same sex couples and open government legislation were signed into law. A governor with a progressive vision began to make his mark on the state. A president began to place his imprint on the country with help from one, and only one, member of the Delaware delegation.
Today, I salute those people holding elective office in Delaware who did the most to advance the progressive agenda this year. There are a couple of notable omissions that I will address as well. Counting down from Number 10:
10. Dr. Michael Katz-State Senator, 4th RD-Not only did he succeed Chateau Charlie and defeat yet another Clatworthy, but Katz has quietly begun to make a difference on health-care issues in Dover. His influence will only grow as Senate leadership becomes more transparent.
9. Joan Deaver-Sussex County Council-By being a lone sane voice in this cesspool of deal-making and interest-swapping, she appears to be an outcast. If there is any hope for Sussex County, she will prove instead to be a harbinger.
8. Bill Oberle-State Representative, 24th RD-A RINO, Oberle provided essential support to pass Markell’s revenue measures. As the original sponsor of HB 99, Oberle has fought for its passage for close to a decade now. He has long since made amends for his initial political ascendancy based on opposition to ‘forced busing’.
7. Tony DeLuca-President Pro-Tempore, Delaware State Senate-While DeLuca is hardly a progressive when it comes to his political philosophy, he was a vital cog in moving both open government legislation and rights for same sex couples through the Senate even before he succeeded Thurman Adams as Pro-Tem. He, in effect, repudiated some of the obstructionism for which the Old Guard was known. One can only hope that this augurs well for the future of open government.
5/6. Tie between State Rep. Terry Schooley and State Senator Dave Sokola-Always among the most effective behind-the-scenes progressive leaders, both have become more influential as leadership has changed in both the House and the Senate. It doesn’t hurt that both were early and consistent supporters of Jack Markell, either. Schooley, through the Kids’ Caucus, has helped enact some landmark legislation, including Matt Denn’s initiatives to ensure that needy children receive health care. Sokola has been in the forefront of education reform, and has actually tried to put some bite back into the previously-toothless Sunset Committee. And both are ‘grownups’ in the often-disfunctional playpen that is the General Assembly.
4. U. S. Senator Ted Kaufman-So this is what a Democratic U. S. Senator from Delaware could be! Maybe not worrying about being reelected frees one up to follow one’s conscience. If so, we can be thankful that Kaufman has a conscience. We can also be thankful that his working knowledge of the Senate has enabled him to be more than a placeholder. He has had an important and positive impact on the health care debate, and he has furthered the progressive cause in so doing. If the Beaudhisattva doesn’t run, I’d be all in with Kaufman, and he’d easily defeat Metamucil Mike in the faceoff.
3. House Majority Leader Pete Schwartzkopf-This is how it’s done, folks. Schwartzkopf expertly used his power to push through the Governor’s agenda and to help enact several progressive pieces of legislation. In so doing, he effectively leveraged his Caucus’ position to force and/or cajole the Senate leadership to act, something that had not happened previously. As an early and loyal supporter of Jack Markell’s, Schwartzkopf is by far the most well-positioned and influentual legislator in the House. Fearless, but not reckless, he’s a born leader. I can’t wait to see what he does next.
2. Governor Jack Markell-Let the debate over whether he’s a ‘progressive’ begin. I say it’s a no-brainer. He has challenged the ‘Delaware Way’ and the orthodoxy that has been in place since the years of Pete duPont for the first time. He has signed both open government legislation and legislation barring discrimination against same sex couples into law. He has a vision for Delaware’s economic future and has already begun to carry it out. Two vacant auto plants? No problem. And, in both cases, the solutions are likely to yield ‘green jobs’, the kind that Markell envisioned when he brought West Coast wunderkind Colin O’Mara to Delaware. And, despite his challenging of the orthodoxy, he was somehow able to get a budget passed in the toughest of economic circumstances. A hell of a first year.
1. State Senator Karen Peterson-If this becomes an annual award, we should seriously consider naming it in her honor. She earns my top nod for perhaps the single gutsiest move I’ve seen by a legislator in the past 25 years–successfully petitioning the Open Government legislation out of Thurman Adams’ desk drawer. Failure could have consigned her to the legislative equivalent of Siberia. Karen Peterson didn’t care, she did what she believed was right. In many ways, Peterson could/should serve as an example to the ‘Democrats’ who seem to have been ‘Stockholm-Syndromed‘ into being wusses. We don’t need wusses, we need people like Karen Peterson, strong, dedicated to the progressive cause, and willing to take risks to get things done. Karen Peterson is an easy choice for me as Most Valuable for 2009.
Three Who Didn’t Make the List:
1. Matt Denn-No, my love affair for one of Delaware’s most essential policymakers has not abated. And, yes, by my own criteria, he should be high up on this list. (Hey, he’s both short and funny. I like short and funny.) This is a one-time-only protest vote. By running for Lt. Governor and not identifying a worthy successor, he bears some responsibility for the Rogue’s Gallery currently doing the plundering in the Insurance Commissioner’s office. I’ll see you on the list next year, Matt.
2. John Kowalko-There is not a single legislator more devoted to the progressive cause than Kowalko. He has a truly good heart. However, as I’ve argued on this blog previously, he has assumed a lone wolf stance, never shies away from a microphone to castigate others or claim full credit for something, and voted against an important part of the Governor’s revenue package. Unfortunately, his actions have had a decidedly negative impact on his effectiveness as a legislator. I would love to see John rethink his approach with an eye towards what he can do to have more of an impact.
3. Joe Biden-Round up the votes for health care reform, starting with your buddy Tom Carper. Then we’ll talk.
This list in no way reflects the collective consensus of the contributors here at DL. That is b /c there is no collective consensus here. Each of our minds works in mysterious ways that nobody, save perhaps Cassandra, can begin to fathom.
This list is designed to start conversations, not end them. So bring it on, suckers! Who would you include and who would you omit? And, if you put together your own list, please share it with us.
Tags: Delaware, Jack Markell, Tom Carper
I merely aspire to make this list….
You’ll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious.
OK, this is where you and I differ. You obviously have some bug up your ass about Kowalko to exclude him from your list. His support of the Bluewater PPA was one of the reasons that it got as far as Deluca giving in to the inevitable. The reason that it was inevitable was because of the work of people like John Kowalko.
Further, and I suspect the reason for your bitterness, Kowalko is the ONLY legislator that put serious effort into meeting the challenge of the Governor to come up with alternative ways to close the budget gap. The truth is that the Governor was never interested in hearing alternatives that diverged from his agenda. If Kowalko’s level of effort, involvement and knowledge isn’t progressive, you and I have different definitions.
And to include Oberle is another slap in the face, he is a Republican that lives in a district that has been trending D for a while, yet he has had no serious challenger in decades. His votes for the things that had to be done to close the budget were nothing but following Cathcart’s orders. I will grant you that Oberle is one of the more progressive Republicans, to put him on a list that excludes Kowalko and Denn is nothing short of idiocy.
Finally, I will say that the jury is still out on Dr. Katz. One could also consider the non-traditional progressive of Earl Jaques. He has worked tirelessly to build his knowledge of the issues and the system that he must work within. He is a little rough around the edges, but he is coming around nicely.
Near total agreement on my part. Too, too bad Ted won’t run, I would love to see a good Castle stomping.
Does anyone notice that no one from Wilmington ever makes these progressive lists?
Ted Kaufman has been a wonder to observe. It is amazing to watch someone work who isn’t spending much of his time calculating how this thing or that vote furthers his career — he is just doing his job and he appears to be having fun at it.
Deluca I think came around on helping to turn back the obstructionism because he could see that that was where his bread would be buttered. I think that he has quite aways to go to be truly progressive.
If I could rearrange the world, I’d make it so that Karen Peterson would run for the House seat or for Senate.
Even though economic circumstances haven’t let him pursue the vision he campaigned on, I am really glad that Markell is in the Governor’s office helping to guide policy to get us out of this mess. I am holding judgment on ridding himself of the “Delaware Way” just yet.
Kowalko and Oberle help me make a point that judging “progressiveness” based upon whether or not the individual supports the Administration’s budget initiatives doesn’t make much sense. There are alot of issues that progressives care about and using an incumbent Governor’s want list as evidence of a legislator’s progressiveness doesn’t make much sense to me.
I don’t think that Matt Denn is responsible for the transition of his previous office to someone not exactly of his caliber. But I don’t think that any of us think that there was anyone running for that office of Denn’s caliber. If he had made sure of a succession plan we’d be calling him out on the Delaware Way and we’d be right. Really, it is the Party that should make sure that there are viable candidates being groomed for upward mobility. Personally, I think that the work that Denn is doing to highlight and to address children’s issues is a big deal — just making sure that early developmental screening is available is a pretty big achievement, I think.
Katz has indeed impressed me. I believe that it is common for freshman senators to stand back and be herded. Katz has stood up early. For instance, he was MUCH more supportive of HB5/SB121 than was Bethany Hall-Long (or DeLuca).
DeLuca–you tell me when DuLuca signed petitions to bring bills (open gov’t or banning discrimination based on sexual orientation) out of Adams’ committee and I’ll agree with you. Failing that, YOU ARE 100% WRONG TO INCLUDE DELUCA ON THIS LIST. I would love for your tea-leaf-reading predictions to be true for DeLuca’s embrace of open government, however I suspect that you are smoking something (and some pretty good shit, mon).
Kowalko–I agree with the points that liberalgeek and cassandra raise in questioning your logic. You call him a lone wolf for refusing to be pressured by administration officials who were essentially blackmailing him. Indeed it is a good question as to what is worth taking a stand on. You disagree with John on this stand. I don’t think that he has anything close to a trend in being stubborn. For that matter, by his grandstanding and microphone holding, he provides (weaker-willed) colleagues with political cover to support important progressive causes in a quieter fashion, which furthers progressive causes in Dover.
Your posting implies that Oberle was more of a leader in the passage of HB5/SB121. Sokola was the central figure who accomplished much more than Oberle. Getting the bill through the house was a cake walk–the heavy lifting was done in the senate. Yes, Oberle was an early ally (based on your criteria, Denn should make the list based on the work during his years as IC–shouldn’t the list be based on what you’ve done lately?)
Oberle will have a serious challenger this time. He’s coasting on his reputation for years and all he did was not stand in the way of the budget.
DeLuca – thumbs down. He finally did what the people wanted by letting the open government bill pass. Why does he get credit for giving in to the inevitable?
I think the jury is probably still out on Katz but I’m sure he’ll be a stellar legislator.
I love Ted Kaufman.
#1 on any list in my opinion should be the progressive activists. The activists worked very, very hard this year – on open government and on health care reform. They deserve a big THANK YOU from all of us.
#2 on my list would be rank-and-file Democrats. The rank-and-file were the ones who made the health care resolution so strong.
I agree 100% on Karen Peterson.
I disagree 100% on DeLuca. He should not be on the list. He went kicking and screaming on the Open Government legislation and supported it only because he had to. This does not make a progressive. He is a menace to good government in Delaware for many reasons.
This is good stuff. Keep the vitriol coming. Just one point about my list–these are not lifetime achievement awards, but rather a list of those who I think most advanced the cause this year. I certainly don’t consider DeLuca a progressive, but I’m not sure that both HB 5 and SB 121 would have passed w/o his help. Don’t forget that it was DeLuca who assigned HB 5 to a favorable committee after years of it languishing in Uncle Thurm’s desk drawer.
I admit that I don’t know what to make of Earl Jaques. No doubt he doesn’t fit any easy labels. But progressive? Maybe, but I need to see more. I’d also look at Mike Barbieri as someone who may make more of a progressive impact as he gets acclimated as well.
As to Oberle, if you recall, he was and is right at the top of my 10 Most Vulnerable Republicans list. I would strongly support a quality opponent in that district, and with UI beating the bushes, I’d fully expect a strong challenger, and I expect the challenger would prevail.
I expect Oberle to voluntarily retire. His district is the most vulnerable in the state and Democrats no longer feel like they need his political cover. He has little support among Republicans. He has almost no base beyond personality. Then again the party may ask him for two more terms. It could use the seat.
I just wonder what you plan for the New Year. Did you do your Christmas shopping in May? Is it a little early for year end lists? That’s right, progressives aren’t bound by things like calenders and tradition.
Rethug David: Last time I checked, the General Assembly doesn’t go back into session until January. For all intents and purposes, this year’s history has been written.
As to Oberle, the one thing that would ensure his retirement is for the Rethugs to push him for two more terms. He is an outcast in that caucus and the Party as YOU YOURSELF indicated:
“He has little support among Republicans.”
Either way, the R’s are screwed in the 24th.
“Outsider” speaking here–but geez, if you aren’t impressed w/ Earl Jaques, I sure am. He has been a real listener, and doer down here w/ workforce housing, and the school district. He has shown a tremendous effort in working thru these difficult situations. Maybe not progressive, but at least he’s attentive to the constituent base and follows through w/ questions etc..This is huge for us to get a response and showing, so around here that’s progressive!! He really hit the track running with the outcry, and it is appreciated.
Katz is rumored to be on the verge of leaving the legislature, at the end of his term if not sooner.
Pete Schwartzkopf is about as progressive as anyone else who has achieved the post of captain in the state police, which is to say, he’s not progressive at all. And your criticism of Kowalko borders on the bizarre, or would if it didn’t sound just like the bullshit conventional “wisdom” of ranking party leaders — you know, the geniuses who tried to give us John Carney and Gene Reed Jr.
You are ranking people on what they did rather than who they are. In that regard, people like DeLuca and Schwartzkopf make your list because they performed loyal service in their official roles, despite their personal conservatism.
Pete has been the leading Democrat in Sussex County to push for equality for the gay and lesbian coummunity down here. No other Democratic elected official, until Joan Deaver arrived on the scene last year, has done as much. He reaches out to everyone in the district, even the conservatives, because that’s who Pete is. He slammed George Parish when he was running his push poll against Greg Fuller last year. Pete deserves to be on this list.
Carper already on board for health care.
Markell gets #2 for signing bills presented to him. Like Bob Welch getting Cy Young because A’s scored lots of runs.
Hey, everybody, I’d welcome your own lists.
A couple of comments: Geezer is right. My criteria for my list is, and I quote, “…those people holding elective office in Delaware who did the most to advance the progressive agenda this year.” And, yes, it is why JK didn’t make my list.
Being a progressive-at-heart is less important to me than the results. YMMV. So, submit your own lists and, if you wish, establish your own criteria.
Geezer, you’re wrong about Schwartzkopf, however. He blows up the stereotypes, he really does. He is one of the most progressive members of the General Assembly, bar none.
John ‘Intake’ Manifold (still my favorite nom-de-plume), the Governor sets the legislative agenda. He doesn’t just sit there and wait for whatever comes across his desk. He submits a budget (something Ruth Ann Minner neglected to do before leaving office even though it was her constitutional responsibility to do so). He lays out his priorities in his State of the State address. JM, you really KNOW better than to say that he rates high on this list for ‘signing bills presented to him’. This governor was anything but passive.
Finally, here’s a way that both JK and Markell can tie for #1 next year for this Highly Coveted Honor: Reintroduce progressivity into the Personal Income Tax. It has vanished over a 25-year period to the point that those earning $60K pay the same percentage as the Chateau billionaires. That is inequitable and must change, especially in the wake of another budget shortfall.
I wish I could take ES and MJ on faith about Schwartzkopf. I agree he’s a welcome change from the usual antediluvian ex-cops in the GA, but I still think he has done the state a disservice by vouching for John Atkins. To me that stinks more of the state cops protecting an asset than anything progressive.
Joan Deaver was on WGMD this morning facing the talk-show host who seems to spend an hour every morning bashing her as a godless communist. She really comes across as a class-act on the radio. I can’t imagine how tough her job must be surrounded by the Slower Lower Bubbas who are pictured in the dictionary under “Good Ol’ Boys’ Club”.
Geezer-the Atkins question is a fascinating one. Here’s my take.
(1) I think Schwartzkopf genuinely believes that people can change. So do I, for that matter. And, when you meet Atkins, he seems like quite the ingratiating guy, as do many sociopaths and/or politicians. I happen to think that Atkins has sociopathic tendencies and cannot change. You really don’t know much about people like that until they either act out or get caught. At some point, I think the real Atkins will surface again.
(2) From the world of Realpolitik, Atkins not only has a D after his name, but he has to pretty much tow the straight-and-narrow or risk becoming a Man Without a Caucus. So, yes, politics clearly played a part in this.
There are no more political virgins out there. That’s why I opted for a Results-Oriented Measuring Stick, I didn’t know any other useful way to do it.
And, obviously, it was a subjective measuring stick as well. After all, this is just one person’s list.
El S–as always, thanks for putting out food for thought (and a target for attack 😉
You believe people can change?
And people say liberals have no religion. 😉
ES – I find it astounding that you put Markell on the list and excluded JK and then say they can both be on next year if they pass a change that Kowalko suggested THIS year.
I would also submit that the changes to the Violent Crimes Compensation Board had a lot to do with Kowalko and was in the top 3 legislative accomplishments this year.
And on Deluca:
http://kavips.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/pamphleteers-unite/
Geezer – I want to hear more about Katz’s thoughts of moving on…
Republican David – this is a “Thankful for…” post. Isn’t this the time on the calendar where we recount what we are thankful for?
If Pete really believes people can change, he’s the most unusual ex-cop in America. Most cops get so jaded after a couple of years on the force that they arrive at exactly the opposite conclusion. Maybe I’m just too skeptical, but I’ll wait before putting him on my (non-existent) list. I’ll say this — he’s not an easy guy to say no to, so he’s done an excellent job so far.
LG: Don’t know much more. I’ve only heard that the partners in his practice are not pleased with how much time Dover takes, and he might have to choose between his job and his part-time job.
Interesting. And that is after only one year of a four year stint.
It’s one of the problems with a technically part-time legislature. It’s not a part-time job, unless you do it the way a few lazy back-benchers do.
ES, do you really think Kaufman would beat Castle? I know the Dems never usually TRY, but Castle does have a pretty long winning streak and i don’t give the average voter much credit. The people who would largely turn out to defeat Castle, (the huge numbers who turned out to vote for obama)aren’t the typical mid term voters. Castle gets ALL of slower lower and may get a lot of the ignorant vote based on name recognition alone…. even more of a chilling thought, will the Delaware political machine that seems to treat Mike Castle as more of a chess adversary than a political foe who works against the wishes of the majority of his state? I think only Beau Biden and a really good ground campaign with the same numbers of “kids” who turned out for Obama can turn this state full blue.
It’s one of the problems with a technically part-time legislature.
And one of the reasons why there are so many of them who have State or other government day jobs or who are retired. I’ve been approached to run for office and cannot imagine how I could get that done as well as get my regular job done. In many ways the system is sort of arranged to work best for those who are already wrapped up in government obligations.
LG-While I salute Kowalko for the Violent Crimes Compensation bill, (a) it was a Sunset Committee bill and not his bill alone, and (b) Kowalko placed its passage in jeopardy with his late June antics. Sokola rescued it.
Which brings me to the point that I’ve tried to make at least 3 times in this thread, but doesn’t seem to register: Kowalko has such potential to be a real progressive leader. However, his grandstanding and ascribing to himself a sense of purity that he suggests is lacking in others is PRECISELY WHAT PREVENTS HIM from having more impact.
I wrote on this blog about my support for some of Kowalko’s fiscal proposals, especially restoring some progressivity to the PIT. However, getting your ideas accepted requires working with other legislators. Showing up at a JFC meeting and writing several op-eds about it is not enough. More elbow grease is required, i.e. legit two-way conversation with other legislators and the Governor’s office.
If, as LG suggests, I’ve got a ‘bug up my butt’ about Kowalko, it is b/c I’ve seen at least one other very progressive legislator with similar strengths and weaknesses as Kowalko get marginalized in Dover, and his effectiveness significantly lessened.
I DON’T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN TO JOHN, AND I FEAR THAT IT IS HAPPENING TO JOHN.
I’ve previously said that I think that John can either work to be effective in Dover, or he can be the darling of the blogosphere, talk radio, and the op-ed pages. I honestly don’t think he can do both.
Believe me, if I didn’t think he was worth it and so potentially valuable, I wouldn’t waste my time pissing off my friends and colleagues.
Have I made myself clear?
Geezer – you need to spend some time with Pete, as a lot of us in his district do, to learn about him and how he views things. Not all cops are conservatives, just as not all public defenders are liberals. Pete is progressive.
ES – No. You wrap your pettiness in a garb of misconceptions. Kowalko’s job as a progressive is to talk about what he believes. It is to challenge the status quo. It is to dare the powers that be in Dover to marginalize him. The fact that you haven’t seen a progressive do something doesn’t mean that it cannot, it means that there has been a dearth of progressives.
The reason that the VCCB bill was in jeopardy was because of another one of Kowalko’s votes, then you have just forfeited the right to say that he wasn’t the main proponent of the bill in the house.
Your argument seems to be based on the Delaware Way thinking of “you need to go along to get along” and I see Kowalko as something different. I ask you why the VCCB bill passed, and you name another legislator. I will tell you that the bill was a good one that Kowalko worked diligently to pass. It was good legislation that should have sailed through. But it was challenged at every turn by the Delaware Way and many of the pseudo-progressives that you have on your list.
I cannot understand why you are hating on one of the two true progressives in the legislature because he actually engages the media and pushes back.
Have I made myself clear?
By the way, this thread should clear up any misconceptions of this site being an echo chamber.
El Som – kudos for putting yourself out there – that takes guts.
I must agree with Geek that Kowalko going to bat for progressive ideas in the media is an accomplishment in and of itself. Kowalko provides some of the wind behind the sails of the progressive activists and rank-and-filers who do the legwork that convinces the rest of the legislature what is needed, popular, and/or inevitable. You have to understand that to be truly effective, we need to work on multiple fronts – and we already have some good progressive legislators working the “behind-the-scenes” angle. If you want Kowalko to be less vocal and confrontational, then who the hell will stand up for us? Your analysis gives all the credit to the people who make the laws, but Kowalko makes people make laws. He’s a standard-bearer.
I think you need both the fire-breathers and the consensus-builders. The issue with fire-breathers, like ‘Bulo points out, is that the media will start ignoring them and that makes them less effective.
I think the problem with fire-breathers is that, if they are legislators, the other legislators will ignore them or marginalize them. I can cite chapter-and-verse on either side of the ideological spectrum. If they are solely fire-breathers and are either unable or unwilling to master the legislative ‘inside game’ as Karen Peterson, for example, has, the fire will die from lack of oxygen.
And all the oxygen rushing to said firebreathers’ heads from those who idolize them from the blogosphere will do nothing to make them more effective in Dover. It will just encourage them to seek and savor acclaim rather than getting down to the sometimes dirty business of legislating.
From a general perusal of all the the arguments on these pages, the effective solution regarding Kowalko, would be to pair him with one of our more brilliant political strategists.
It also appears from this discussion that it was progressive pressure on DeLuca that has driven him back to his democratic roots…
And there can be no more argument: that winning the position of lieutenant governor is taking a trip into the realm of ineffectiveness…. It happened to Carney. It’s happening now.
“I think the problem with fire-breathers is that, if they are legislators, the other legislators will ignore them or marginalize them. I can cite chapter-and-verse on either side of the ideological spectrum. If they are solely fire-breathers and are either unable or unwilling to master the legislative ‘inside game’ as Karen Peterson, for example, has, the fire will die from lack of oxygen.
And all the oxygen rushing to said firebreathers’ heads from those who idolize them from the blogosphere will do nothing to make them more effective in Dover. It will just encourage them to seek and savor acclaim rather than getting down to the sometimes dirty business of legislating.”
I think that’s probably the most accurate assessment of Kowalko’s I’ve ever seen articulated. Spot on. And I happen to like him quite a bit, but I have grown increasingly concerned that there is a lot more bluster coming out than anything else.
I must be missing something here. ElS puts DeLuca in the top ten list for advancing progressive causes in 2009. The justification mentions the role he played in the open government and anti-discrimination legislation.
One little problem. DeLuca was neither a sponsor nor co-sponsor of either. Both bills made it through the Senate despite DeLuca.
I understood that Adams had already agreed to let the anti-discrimination bill through, not because Adams (or DeLuca) finally saw the progressive light, but because there were enough progressive senators (of both parties) who outnumbered the conservatives. rather than lose face and have a bill petitioned, successfully, out of Adams’ committee, Adams agreed to let another bill be introduced, and Adams agreed to put it in a committee which would pass it forward. DeLuca did nothing to advance that cause, nor that of open government.
Much progressive accomplishments were made in Dover this year, despite DeLuca’s presence.
Including DeLuca in this list makes it very hard to put any stock in those on, or not on, the list.
If I were Kowalko, I’d be proud to be excluded from any list that includes DeLuca.
Adams had already lost face when the open gov’t legislation was petitioned out of committee, thanks to Karen Peterson.
The facts, which may or may not equate with your understanding, is that DeLuca, in the role of acting Pro-Tem (Adams was ill), assigned the bill to a favorable committee, one which was almost unanimously supportive of the measure. In the past, I’ve seen Adams put such bills in Venables’ Small Business committee, or one of Vaughn’s committees, which was the same as burying a bill in Adams’ own desk drawer.
So, DeLuca DID do something to advance the cause. I have nowhere stated that I consider DeLuca a progressive. Quite the contrary. I think I’ve written somewhere that DeLuca is little more than a well-dressed construction trades goon. And I stand by that.
But, anyone who thinks that DeLuca taking over for Adams didn’t have an impact just wasn’t paying attention. I grant you that it’s in the ‘all things are relative’ definition of impact, but it was an impact nonetheless.
BTW, lost in this question of whether DeLuca does or does not belong on the list is the key role that Pete Schwartzkopf played in getting these two bills, and some other key legislation, through.
In the past, when Adams buried a bill like this, Wayne Smith, then House Majority Leader, was happy to see it buried, meaning no pressure was brought to bear on the Senate to work HB 99 (the predecessor in past GA’s to HB 5).
Schwartzkopf made clear that certain Senate bills would not be considered unless HB 5 was worked. It also took that kind of leadership to get the bill passed. One reason why Schwartzkopf rates so highly both on my list this year and in my book of indispensable legislators.
“Not all cops are conservatives”
Yes they are. They might be Democrats, and they might vote for liberal legislation, but of the literally dozens of cops I have known, not one of them would fail to fit under the conservative label. And you make a serious mistake if you think that any of the ex-state cops in the GA don’t put protecting the state police force’s position of power above anything else they do.
ElS: “The facts, which may or may not equate with your understanding, is that DeLuca, in the role of acting Pro-Tem (Adams was ill), assigned the bill to a favorable committee, one which was almost unanimously supportive of the measure. In the past, I’ve seen Adams put such bills in Venables’ Small Business committee, or one of Vaughn’s committees, which was the same as burying a bill in Adams’ own desk drawer.
So, DeLuca DID do something to advance the cause.”
DeLuca assigned the bill to a favorable committee, not due to his leadership, vision, progressiveness, or other positive quality, but solely because his back was up against the wall, due to the progressiveness of his colleagues. Eleven colleagues were on the verge of signing the bill to petition it out of a ‘burying committee.’ A deal was struck–not because DeLuca wanted to advance this progressive bill, but because if he didn’t it would have made it to the senate floor anyway, and DeLuca would have been revealed to all as a crappy leader of the senate.
DeLuca did NOTHING to advance the cause, or at least he did nothing that wasn’t done at the point of a gun. DeLuca (like Adams before him) was able to count to eleven, and realize that there are eleven colleagues more progressive than he, and these eleven refused to let his non-progressiveness stop good legislation. Again, this is not a progressive feather in DeLuca’s hat. It is a feather in the hats of eleven other state senators (led by Dave Sokola).
Did I mention that DeLuca did not only not sponsor/co-sponsor the bill, but he also voted against it? His presence in the senate when this bill passed does not justify giving him credit for its passage, when he fought it tooth and nail, and it advanced due to the assignment to a favorable committee by him only when DeLuca was faced with no choice. By your reasoning (not a perfect use of your reasoning, but not far off), Venables and Adams should also be credited with helping advance this legislation.
DeLuca should be struck from this list (and state senate leadership, and the state senate). It’s a good thing for him that the state Democratic Party does not administer a purity test of its own.
Paul-It’s my list. He’s on it b/c of what he did. You are imputing motives as to what he did. Maybe you’re right, maybe you’re wrong. All you’ve provided is speculation. FWIW, the Senate is HARDLY overrun with progressives, so I find it hard to believe in the ‘inevitability’ argument you’re making. But that’s OK, feel free to disagree. I’ve never claimed that my list was perfect. But, by my criteria, my list remains intact. So, I’m not gonna remove DeLuca from MY list (seriously, that’s a pretty silly request, isn’t it?).
Which is why I’d prefer that you and others make your OWN bleeping lists, fer cryin’ out loud. Establish your OWN criteria.
I’ve been suggesting that all along, and so far no one has done so.
Please, do so.