As I mentioned the other day, I just got back from taking part in a portion of John Edwards’ poverty tour. And while I agree with many observers that the MSM is focusing on really stupid stuff, The Wall Street Journal says something different today, which is worth noting: “Edwards, Trailing Rivals,Holds Sway Over Party’s Agenda.”. So, let’s get this straight: despite the media’s general obsession about the money race and the focus on meaningless polls months before any vote is cast, one outlet (and, perhaps this is a one-shot story) says what should be important in choosing a candidate: she or he is setting the agenda for the party.
I’ve generally stayed away from blog post that focus on this candidate versus the other candidate because my own interest is on driving the issues, in particular around labor and the economy, and changing our party. I decided to travel on part of the poverty tour to try to hear some of the voices of people who rarely get heard in the country and, to Edwards’ credit, voices that he is trying to give a platform to. Here are some of the key parts of the article which is for subscribers only:
John Edwards may be stuck in third place in the polls and fund raising in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination. But the populist seems to be playing an outsized role in driving the terms of the party’s debate — generally to the left — on everything from Iraq to health care.
This week, the former North Carolina senator has made his most prominent bid yet to place the oft-ignored issue of poverty prominently on the 2008 agenda, with a four-day tour of some of the most run-down parts of the South and Midwest, beginning with his sixth trip this campaign to this city, devastated by Hurricane Katrina. He has talked about the issue more than any of his rivals, and was the first to craft a “poverty” plank in his platform.
[I added the emphasis]
And…
Just as former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean pushed the Democrats toward more staunch opposition of the Iraq war four years ago, Mr. Edwards seems to be having a big impact on forcing the pack to follow his agenda.
“He has worked very hard over the past four years to figure out what every constituency wants,” says a leading progressive grass-roots political activist. “He has gone to groups — from labor to environmentalists — and said: ‘How can I be the best on your issues?’ ”
After giving the obligatory discussion over side issues, the reporter, Christopher Cooper, then, comes back to the main theme of the piece:
Still, on issue after issue, Mr. Edwards has been the first to stake out where the party’s consensus message seems to end up.
On Iraq, Mr. Edwards led the tack to the political left, apologizing early for his 2002 vote to authorize the war, pressing Congress to cut off money for the conflict and demanding an immediate exit for U.S. troops. Mr. Edwards’s stance put tremendous pressure on Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton to vote against a recent funding measure, which they did, somewhat quietly. In March, Mr. Edwards laid out a detailed policy on revamping health care, calling for universal coverage — and a business tax to pay for it. The next month, Mr. Obama put out his own proposal to dramatically expand coverage for the uninsured.
On taxing hedge funds and private-equity firms, the leading Democrats remained silent until last week, when Mr. Edwards complained that the current rules allow fund managers to pay taxes “at a lower rate than their secretaries.” Within a few days, Sens. Clinton and Obama both said they back legislation that would raise those taxes.
And the final graf:
In coming weeks, Mr. Edwards plans to shift his focus toward the middle class, and begin including policy statements on trade and taxation, globalization and corporate responsibility. Whether Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton will follow is unclear. “John may try to push them a little farther to the left than they want to go,” an Edwards aide said.
The most important thing, as I read this article, was the point I made above: Edwards is driving the agenda of the Democratic Party, trying to make it a party that is clear, not equivocal and cautious, about economic power, poverty and corporate abuses. [If you like the points made in the piece, email the reporter: Christopher Cooper at christopher.cooper@wsj.com]
I have been truly troubled not just by the media’s obsession with polls and fundraising but by the way in which too many of us–activists, bloggers etc.–get caught up in that very discussion. My home, the labor movement, is the same way, unfortunately, often too focused on being with the “winner” or the “frontrunner”, then, what a candidate can do to truly advance a real agenda for workers (I mused about what criteria labor should use to decide who to support some weeks ago). We forget that leaders come and go and what we want to be left with after they leave the stage is a country that got better because of an agenda that we helped build.
Who knows if Edwards will win the nomination. But, if he’s setting the agenda the party then lives with, wow, that would be an exciting thing to behold.
