Sunday Thoughts on Tuesday's Primary

With little more than a day to go before the primary election, let's step back briefly to survey the landscape.

Robert Barnes of the Washington Post aptly summarizes, I think, the dynamic of the many contests going on across the state:

Maryland is a state where politicians get elected and tend to settle in. But Tuesday's party primaries are the first step in a dramatic reordering of the political hierarchy, one that will mean a new U.S. senator for the first time in decades and could result in new faces in every statewide office.

This is certainly true; but it masks the fact there are in fact two realignments going on. One is merely generational, as old warhorses like Paul Sarbanes, Joe Curran, and Doug Duncan retire, and new people take their place. The other, less prominent but more interesting, involves rank-and-file Democrats yearning for a party that doesn't sit on its laurels or merely bring home bacon for constituents, but actively promotes a vision of what a just society should be doing. You can see this most vividly in the Donna Edwards/Al Wynn primary battle, but also to a lesser extent, in Peter Franchot's run for Comptroller, in Tom Perez' aborted run for Attorney General, and, going local, Jamie Raskin's challenge to longtime Sen. Ida Ruben in Montgomery County. Running through all these races is a common theme: Many in our current Democratic leadership have become calcified and unresponsive, and we need fresh, forward-thinking liberals to take over. Seen in this light, this potential progressive realignment is part of the national effort to revitalize the Democratic Party, though the Internet has played less of a role.

Let me go back to the Maryland 4th congressional primary to explain what I mean. Al Wynn has responded to Edwards' multiple criticisms of his record by citing his support from the AFL-CIO, Planned Parenthood, and other liberal groups [1], as well as many Democratic leaders in Maryland. He even goes so far as to defend his votes for the Bush/Cheney energy bill and the permanent repeal of the estate tax by he was, in effect, responding to the interests of his constituents. Of Edwards, he says:

I'm more concerned about getting money for low-income residents. She's more concerned about having a partisan fight.

What's striking here is how perfectly Wynn's attempt to bolster his liberal credentials fits in with Mark Schmitt's theory of the end of "checklist liberalism." Wynn, like Joe Lieberman before he became a Republican, seems to think he can flash his endorsements in Donna Edwards' face and win -- that is, when he's not condoning having her supporters beaten up by his. The challenge Edwards presents, however, isn't just about issues, it's about identity. Al Wynn may have a liberal voting record viewed as a whole, but he's a bad Democrat: he doesn't come through for the party when it counts, and he's more concerned about satisfying his donors (both known and hidden) than about seeing to the welfare, not only of his constituents, but also of all Americans. He lacks, in other words, a broader perspective of what liberals should be doing in power; and so he thinks he can excuse doing the wrong thing half of the time by doing the right thing the other half of the time. That broader perspective is what Edwards has staked her candidacy on, as have many of the other candidates, like Franchot and Perez, in this state's primaries.

I should stress that I don't want to overemphasize this potential progressive realignment; the Wynn/Edwards primary isn't going to transform the Maryland Democratic Party any more than the Lamont/Lieberman battle transformed the Connecticut Democratic Party -- though it certainly has had an impact. And the last session of the General Assembly shows that the current crop of Democrats are forceful, if maladroit, about promoting a progressive agenda. But going forward, especially if the Democrats sweep the statewide offices this November, the relationship between Democratic leaders and voters in Maryland will be something that needs to be addressed.

[1] Though, if his lying about his support from the Teamsters is any indication, it may be his only real support comes from corporate PACs and high-dollar donors.