Election 2006: Progressive Politics on the Rise

American politics is at a crossroads similar to those of the early 20th century, in which the progressive elements of the Republican Party were able to govern for a decade nationwide and implement significant new programs. These programs included recall of elected officials, referendums on local and state issues, improved public higher education, and an eye toward greater equality throughout the country via economic policies. At present, the Democrats are looking to embrace the progressive tradition, taking it away from an increasingly reactionary Republican Party. However, the question is whether the Democrats can live up to this tradition and whether they can even defeat the Republicans to have a chance at governing as a majority party. Two examples seem to bear out some cautious optimism for Democrats, one being the rise of challenger Ned Lamont in his Senate race against Joe Lieberman, and the hotly contested attorney general race in Wisconsin between Kathleen Falk and Peg Lautenschlager.

The Lamont-Lieberman race for the Democratic nomination in Connecticut seems to be all that the news media can talk about in the 2006 election season. Lamont, a Connecticut businessman whose lone progressive leaning is his opposition to the Iraq War, has drawn derision from moderate and conservative Democrats and praise from the rising alternative media, including blogs and alternative newspapers. Lamont went from trailing incumbent senator Joe Lieberman by 20 to 30 points only a few months ago to taking a ten point lead in a Rasmussen poll on July 29th, 2006. While this is only one poll, it indeed shows the meteoric rise of Lamont and the liberal Democrats in a race that would normally go to the former vice-presidential candidate. However, Democrats need to be leery about being too enthused about a Lamont victory in the upcoming primary. Polls show that Lieberman still has a significant lead as an independent candidate over Lamont and a Republican challenger, approaching the 20 to 25 percent leads that he held over Lamont before the summer started.

A recent article in the Milwaukee alternative paper Shepherd Express about Democratic attorney general candidate Kathleen Falk was a refreshing look at a state politician with an ethical compass. Falk’s record has indicated what she would do as an attorney general, including her conservation work as Wisconsin’s public intervener, an office eliminated a decade ago that was devoted to environmental litigation, and her management experience as Dane County Executive. However, there are more reasons that Falk may defeat incumbent Peg Lautenschlager in the September 2006 primary.

Kathleen Falk may give hope to earnest state politicians who are concerned about rocking the partisan boat within their own parties. The Democratic Party in Wisconsin, and the national party for that matter, has not been all that progressive over the last decade and Falk would bring a greater sense of progressive values to the office of attorney general. Unlike Governor Jim Doyle, Falk would bring a hard-nosed approach to law enforcement in the state as she has in her role as Dane County executive. Falk’s activist approach to the attorney general position would be refreshing to the inert tenure of Doyle and Lautenschlager. Her approach to conservation law, an increase in help for the state crime lab, and her record as an advocate for women’s rights all promise a more progressive approach to law enforcement in Wisconsin.

As well, Peg Lautenschlager has done no huge favors to the Democratic Party with her use of a state vehicle for personal means and her arrest for drunken driving. While Lautenschlager has done an adequate job as attorney general, Falk has a clear set of initiatives that promises law enforcement a leg up in stopping violent crimes. As well, Falk wants aggressive ethics reform in the state government, which is a refreshing idea during a particularly negative campaign season and a recent history of former politicians convicted of financial wrongdoing. While Falk’s name recognition is low, Lautenschlager’s name is associated with questionable ethics that are all too common in Wisconsin government. As well, there is a good chance that Falk would be able to parlay a statewide position with the prominence of the attorney general into a possible run for governor in 2010. Progressives of both parties may see Falk as a bit of fresh air considering the hum-drum support of Democrats for incumbent governor Jim Doyle, if only because Democrats don’t want to see Congressman Mark Green as governor.

Lamont and Falk are but two examples of the rise of different progressive elements throughout the nation. While Lamont is not a full fledged progressive, the politics that matter to people, including education, economy, and military, put him in the progressive camp. Falk is indeed the epitome of a progressive leader and a combination of a good campaign style, solid fundraising, and an unblemished political career could put her over the top of both her Democratic opponent and whomever the Republicans select to run for attorney general. In both cases, Democrats need to reserve their enthusiasm until they are sworn into their respective offices. As well, the Democrats cannot lead a progressive revolution from the background and need many such progressive victories nationwide.