We all know the rap on the Blue Dogs. They talk big, and then they fold under pressure from the Democratic Leadership in the House. Will they do that again on health care reform legislation?
While there are over 50 more moderate Blue Dogs in the Democratic Caucus, not every one of those is really a candidate for a 'no' vote on health reform.
For example, Rep. David Scott (D-GA) is a Blue Dog, but I find it hard to believe that he would vote no on health reform pushed by Democrats.
Others that I would put in that category include four members from the greater Los Angeles area (the Southland), Rep. Adam Schiff, Rep. Joe Baca, Rep. Jane Harman and Rep. Loretta Sanchez.
My apologies to anyone I might offend, but if you are watching TV and listening to radio in the greater Los Angeles area, that doesn't really strike me as "classic" Boll Weevil Democrats.
(The Boll Weevils were the old nickname given to more conservative Democrats from the South, many of whom voted for President Reagan's tax and budget plans in 1981, rebuking Speaker Tip O'Neill along the way.)
As for other Blue Dogs that don't exactly fit the Boll Weevil Model, I would have to include
* Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
* Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
* Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)
* Rep. Dennis Cardozo (D-CA)
* Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA)
* Rep. Zack Space (D-OH)
* The five Blue Dogs from Pennsylvania
It's not to say a couple of these might vote 'no' on reform, but I would be a bit surprised to see the nays concentrated in the Keystone State and California.
Still, when you add in freshmen Democrats, and those in tough seats, you can find your way to forty.
Why is forty important? If 40 Democrats vote no, and all Republicans join them, then the health care bill goes nowhere.
About the Author
Featured
