

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Rep. Cheri Bustos (D-Ill.), chairwoman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, appears at the Washington Press Club Foundation dinner on March 13. (Photo: Tom Williams)
On Friday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats' campaign arm, announced that it will refuse to do business with vendors or consultants who support Democrats attempting to primary incumbent Democrats in blue districts. Firms that contract with the DCCC learned of its decision via a list of new hiring standards sent out Friday morning. "The core mission of the DCCC is electing House Democrats, which includes supporting and protecting incumbents," the form reads. "To that end, the DCCC will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting Member of the House Democratic Caucus."
The most generous read of the DCCC's decision is that it represents ordinary, nonideological professional cowardice. Anyone given the opportunity to create barriers for people who would compete with them for their jobs would likely do so, especially if it were possible to tuck their efforts away in an innocuous-looking form. A more ideological read would hold that the DCCC continues to be frustrated by the success of leftward congressional challengers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who successfully "primaried" then-Democratic caucus chair Joseph Crowley, and hopes to nip the campaigns of these progressive challengers in the bud.
The DCCC's move to undercut primary challengers comes at a particularly ironic moment for the Democrats: 2020 candidates such as Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren have advanced the idea of abolishing the electoral college in order to empower the popular vote; meanwhile, Andrew Gillum has launched a massive voter registration drive in Florida; and Georgia's Stacey Abrams is pushing back against voter suppression in her state. It would be fair to characterize the 2020 Democratic message as primarily centering on the importance of democracy itself, with due focus on enacting the will of the people.
And that makes sense. Globally, thinkers in democratic countries have begun voicing concerns about the rise of strongman authoritarianism and the decline of democratic values. Democrats have led America's contribution to this international defense of democracy, comparing Trump to the anti-democratic, illiberal leaders he praises: Kim Jong Un of North Korea, Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines.
But the DCCC's decision, and establishment Democrats' placid acceptance of it, call into question just how serious the party of democracy is about the practice of democracy. The committee doubtlessly has its reasons for jealously protecting its incumbents, but its members should ask themselves if those reasons ought to supersede the voters' right to choose among candidates in free and fair elections carried out on even fields. If they think they know better than the voters, then by all means, blacklist vendors and consultants who work with primary challengers. But they should be aware that, in doing so, they are undermining what could be the Democrats' clearest and most resonant message heading into 2020 -- and beyond.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
On Friday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats' campaign arm, announced that it will refuse to do business with vendors or consultants who support Democrats attempting to primary incumbent Democrats in blue districts. Firms that contract with the DCCC learned of its decision via a list of new hiring standards sent out Friday morning. "The core mission of the DCCC is electing House Democrats, which includes supporting and protecting incumbents," the form reads. "To that end, the DCCC will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting Member of the House Democratic Caucus."
The most generous read of the DCCC's decision is that it represents ordinary, nonideological professional cowardice. Anyone given the opportunity to create barriers for people who would compete with them for their jobs would likely do so, especially if it were possible to tuck their efforts away in an innocuous-looking form. A more ideological read would hold that the DCCC continues to be frustrated by the success of leftward congressional challengers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who successfully "primaried" then-Democratic caucus chair Joseph Crowley, and hopes to nip the campaigns of these progressive challengers in the bud.
The DCCC's move to undercut primary challengers comes at a particularly ironic moment for the Democrats: 2020 candidates such as Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren have advanced the idea of abolishing the electoral college in order to empower the popular vote; meanwhile, Andrew Gillum has launched a massive voter registration drive in Florida; and Georgia's Stacey Abrams is pushing back against voter suppression in her state. It would be fair to characterize the 2020 Democratic message as primarily centering on the importance of democracy itself, with due focus on enacting the will of the people.
And that makes sense. Globally, thinkers in democratic countries have begun voicing concerns about the rise of strongman authoritarianism and the decline of democratic values. Democrats have led America's contribution to this international defense of democracy, comparing Trump to the anti-democratic, illiberal leaders he praises: Kim Jong Un of North Korea, Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines.
But the DCCC's decision, and establishment Democrats' placid acceptance of it, call into question just how serious the party of democracy is about the practice of democracy. The committee doubtlessly has its reasons for jealously protecting its incumbents, but its members should ask themselves if those reasons ought to supersede the voters' right to choose among candidates in free and fair elections carried out on even fields. If they think they know better than the voters, then by all means, blacklist vendors and consultants who work with primary challengers. But they should be aware that, in doing so, they are undermining what could be the Democrats' clearest and most resonant message heading into 2020 -- and beyond.
On Friday, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats' campaign arm, announced that it will refuse to do business with vendors or consultants who support Democrats attempting to primary incumbent Democrats in blue districts. Firms that contract with the DCCC learned of its decision via a list of new hiring standards sent out Friday morning. "The core mission of the DCCC is electing House Democrats, which includes supporting and protecting incumbents," the form reads. "To that end, the DCCC will not conduct business with, nor recommend to any of its targeted campaigns, any consultant that works with an opponent of a sitting Member of the House Democratic Caucus."
The most generous read of the DCCC's decision is that it represents ordinary, nonideological professional cowardice. Anyone given the opportunity to create barriers for people who would compete with them for their jobs would likely do so, especially if it were possible to tuck their efforts away in an innocuous-looking form. A more ideological read would hold that the DCCC continues to be frustrated by the success of leftward congressional challengers such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), who successfully "primaried" then-Democratic caucus chair Joseph Crowley, and hopes to nip the campaigns of these progressive challengers in the bud.
The DCCC's move to undercut primary challengers comes at a particularly ironic moment for the Democrats: 2020 candidates such as Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren have advanced the idea of abolishing the electoral college in order to empower the popular vote; meanwhile, Andrew Gillum has launched a massive voter registration drive in Florida; and Georgia's Stacey Abrams is pushing back against voter suppression in her state. It would be fair to characterize the 2020 Democratic message as primarily centering on the importance of democracy itself, with due focus on enacting the will of the people.
And that makes sense. Globally, thinkers in democratic countries have begun voicing concerns about the rise of strongman authoritarianism and the decline of democratic values. Democrats have led America's contribution to this international defense of democracy, comparing Trump to the anti-democratic, illiberal leaders he praises: Kim Jong Un of North Korea, Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines.
But the DCCC's decision, and establishment Democrats' placid acceptance of it, call into question just how serious the party of democracy is about the practice of democracy. The committee doubtlessly has its reasons for jealously protecting its incumbents, but its members should ask themselves if those reasons ought to supersede the voters' right to choose among candidates in free and fair elections carried out on even fields. If they think they know better than the voters, then by all means, blacklist vendors and consultants who work with primary challengers. But they should be aware that, in doing so, they are undermining what could be the Democrats' clearest and most resonant message heading into 2020 -- and beyond.