Harold Meyerson writes:
And the liberal case for Casey is a strong one -- particularly on trade. A critic of both the North American and Central American free-trade agreements, Casey wants trade pacts that require signatory nations to enforce worker rights and environmental protections. A number of leading Democratic senatorial candidates this year -- Ohio's Sherrod Brown, Vermont's Bernie Sanders (an independent who's in effect a Democrat) and, yes, Connecticut's Ned Lamont -- share Casey's perspective on trade. Their victories would shift, perhaps decisively, the Senate Democratic caucus toward a trade policy in which Main Street is taken at least as seriously as Wall Street. It's a shift, if the Main Streets of central Pennsylvania are any indication, that would come not a moment too soon.
I'm a bit unconvinced on Casey, but Meyerson does alight on an encouraging dynamic for 2006. In past elections, Democrats support a lot of bland, animatronic men and women who affiliate with out party in order to either entrench or create a less offensive majority. But this year, there are a slew of genuine progressive candidates with a serious shot at election who, if brought in, would radically energize and liberalize the Democratic caucus. Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders, Ned Lamont, Jon Tester, and Jim Webb all have the potential to move the Senate in a more congenial direction -- not just changing its majority, but literally shifting its tone to the left, widening the spectrum of acceptable and legitimate opinion.
These are the sort of candidates who would support universal health care rather than incremental reform, full campaign financing rather than McCain-Feingold, an indexed minimum wage rather than the occasional minor increase, and so on. They would shift the institution's Democratic culture away from apologetic compromise and towards a proud and renewed progressivism. For the first time in my short political life, the Democrats are fielding a team that genuinely excites me, that contains members who I want to see in the Senate not because of their party affiliation, but because of their ideologies. For that reason, 2006 offers more than a chance to temporarily retake power -- it's an exquisitely rare opportunity to stock the Senate with a new, better breed of Democrat. And if it fails, who knows when liberals will get another chance?
