Washington – House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is calmly assessing the political cyclone that just two days earlier had routed her Democratic majority and will, at least temporarily, force her to vacate one of the best offices in the city and its inspirational view of the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial.
She keeps coming back to the courage of her colleagues who cast hard votes that helped make the last two years one of Congress’ most productive periods in recent times — and helped make her one of the most effective speakers in history. Her message is unmistakable: Democrats have nothing to apologize for, nothing to be ashamed of, and nothing to regret.
“One of the members called me and said, ‘I’m in a tough race. It’s even. I don’t know how it’s going to turn out,'” she recalls. “‘But I know one thing: that I wouldn’t do anything differently. I wouldn’t change my vote on health care reform no matter how they tried to describe it. It was important for me to vote to give the opportunity that that bill provides.'”
“These members know what they believe in,” she notes, clearly channeling her own feelings through those of her colleagues. “They will have plenty of options in life. I hope one of them is to consider coming back to Congress.”
Pelosi clearly is not ready to allow millions of dollars in Republican attack ads to drive her from public life. She wants another crack at vindicating in an election a record that she believes already stands well on the merits.
About how she was used this year as a political pinata, she is philosophical. Republicans, she says, always look for a liberal they can target, and for decades, the choice was the late Edward M. Kennedy. What was done to her, she says, “was almost chicken feed” by comparison. “Now they didn’t have him,” she adds. “To some extent they did this with Mrs. Clinton for a while.” And then she performs the political math. “Now you take a woman and a progressive and you put it together. … “
And she stops, and breaks out laughing. She won’t say it herself, but points to a comment by Martin Frost, her former House colleague, who noted that a woman from liberal San Francisco was the ideal Republican target. “I don’t think they could have done this to a male speaker,” Frost told USA Today.
But Pelosi’s rule on the gender issue is: “Don’t underestimate, don’t overestimate, just move on from it.” So identity politics is absent when she’s asked point blank why the Republicans attacked her so fiercely.
“Because I’m effective,” she says matter-of-factly. “It’s why they had to do it. They had to put a stop to me because we were effective in passing health care reform which the health insurance industry wanted to stop, Wall Street reform which Wall Street wanted to stop, (reforms of) students loans for taking the money out of the banks and giving it back to the taxpayer and to families. They had to put a stop to that.”
And in what might be a read as a reminder as to why she should remain as leader, she adds: “I’m one of the most effective fundraisers that the Congress has had … because I believe in something.”
Pelosi is already thinking about how Democrats move forward. Her analysis of why the party lost the House is compact. “Nine and a half percent unemployment damaged the majority,” she says. “What made a difference in the election is the fact that they said we are spending money and where are the jobs?” While she believes that what Democrats did on health care, education and Wall Street reform was ultimately about fixing the economy, the party has to think “shorter term” in putting “jobs, jobs, jobs front and center.”
Nowhere is it written that a speaker has to step down from a leadership position after losing the majority. Between 1945 and 1955, Democrat Sam Rayburn and Republican Joe Martin swapped the speakership four times.
Yes, there are valid political reasons for House Democrats to change leaders after their defeat. But there is an argument in justice that the woman who built their majority should have a shot at winning it back. And isn’t everyone tired of Democrats who reflexively capitulate to the other side’s narrative.
Pelosi, simultaneously progressive, tough-minded and realistic, understands both arguments as well as anyone.
E.J. Dionne’s e-mail address is ejdionne(at)washpost.com.
(c) 2010, Washington Post Writers Group
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.