Before I start this diary entry, I just want to express my gratitude to everybody who responded positively to my first diary entry. I never knew I would be received so well in such a large online community. I truly appreciate all the positive feedback I've been receiving, and all the requests that I continue posting new entries. Well, since I've been asked to, you can find my second diary entry, this time on the single-payer movement in Vermont, below the fold.
Over the past few days, I've grown preoccupied with trying to find an explanation for the progressive evolution of the State of Vermont which has been a long and arduous process since the 1960's, which saw the state elect its first Democratic Governor since 1853, vote for the first time for a Democratic presidential candidate, and abolish the death penalty. But even though after the 60's, the Democratic Party would continue to compete for statewide elected offices, it wasn't until 1992 that Vermont would complete the reversal of its presidential electoral history and become a reliably "Blue" state. That, along with the re-election of Democratic Acting Governor Howard Dean and a Democratic legislature, ushered in a new era in the state. With the formation of the Vermont Progressive Party in 1999, it was clear that Vermont was emerging as a liberal bastion of America. This notion was only furthered by the election of 4 Progressive members of the State House of Representatives in 2002.
At this point, you may be asking yourselves, "What does this have to do with the passage of single payer health care in Vermont?" Well, that's the exact same question since I first started studying the state's electoral history earlier this week. The answer to this question may actually have its roots in the state's 2008 gubernatorial election, in which Progressive Party operatives, disappointed with the dismal showing by Democratic nominee Scudder Parker against right-wing Republican Governor Jim Douglas in 2006, decided to field their own candidate in the next election. To the surprise of many, the Progressive candidate Anthony Pollina finished second ahead of Democratic nominee Gaye Symington.
Which brings us to 2010. Having a strong candidate in Peter Shumlin, the Democratic Party was faced with another bruising split in the liberal vote as Progressive Party chair Martha Abbott was shaping up to be a formidable candidate in the election, and it seemed that, once again, Jim Douglas would benefit from a divided Left. Then, inexplicably to the casual observer, Abbott announced her withdrawal from the race in late August, allowing Shumlin to secure a narrow gubernatorial pickup for the Democrats in a devastating year for the Party as a whole. While the decision by Martha Abbott to drop out of the race may have, at the time, been seen as a personal decision, this blogger cannot help but think that there was something else going on behind the scenes.
This brings us back to the renewed effort in Vermont to pass a single payer health care program. One thing that struck me about the whole debate within the state was that Shumlin has turned out to be a pretty significant supporter of the legislation. Given the fact that newly elected Democratic Governors Dan Malloy of Connecticut and Jerry Brown of California have been reluctant to embrace such programs being proposed in their states, Shumlin has sort of bucked the trend, since it is sort of Beltway Common Wisdom that Democratic gubernatorial candidates who survive Republican wave elections, especially those who pick up gubernatorial seats from Republicans, need to buck their liberal and progressive base and sprint to the Right. This, however, has not been the case in Vermont. Shumlin has been governing...well, like a Democrat! I know, unbelievable, right? Going back to Abbott's withdrawal from the 2010 gubernatorial election, one can't help but think that this may be the product of pressure from a strong, well-entrenched liberal and progressive political movement within the state of Vermont, one that has the potential to torpedo Democratic candidates' electoral hopes in the state if they don't fulfill the hopes and wishes of the people who nominate and elect them.
This realization that progressives (both lower-case "p" and capital "P") actually have significant influence in Vermont, which they have been cultivating for the better part of the last decade, got me to wondering, "Can this happen anywhere else?" And I've come to the conclusion that yes, it can. We just need to take the initiative to make it happen, to stop simply supporting Democratic candidates carte-blanche, and follow the Vermont model, by forming either national or state political parties geared towards influencing elected Democratic officials to support progressive causes, whether they be single payer health care, same-sex marriage, abolition of the death penalty, and a host of others. The Vermont Progressive Party has been a success story in this area, and it is my hope that other operations such as the Oregon Progressive Party, New York Working Families Party and others eventually achieve the same electoral and legislative success as has been done in Vermont. Because the Democratic Party's umbrella already has too many people under it to accommodate us anymore. It's high time we started raising hell in the states and nationally, and forcing them to allow us out of the rain and back under it.
Please comment below. Thank you.