11.27.02 @ 12:04AM
A leading feminazi PAC hangs Democrat Mary Landrieu out to dry.
The Senate seat of Democrat Mary Landrieu is hanging by a
thread. Unable to win an outright majority on November 5,
Louisiana's Southern-fried election laws have forced her into a
December 7 runoff with the top Republican vote getter, Suzanne Haik
Terrell.
It's a close race and nobody's taking it for granted. Right
after the election, planeloads of Republican and Democratic
activists parachuted into Louisiana to duke it out.
But one major left-wing group isn't weighing in: Emily's
List.
The 17-year-old feminist PAC devoted to electing pro-choice
Democratic women once supported Landrieu. No longer. Landrieu, you
see, once voted to ban partial birth abortions. As far as Emily's
List is concerned, that is unforgivable.
The fact that Landrieu's record is otherwise pro-choice and
Terrell is pro-life doesn't move it. Nor does the fact that Terrell
could add one more vote to the new GOP Senate majority.
"I don't think we are interested in electing anybody who is
going to weaken abortion laws," said Janet Harris, the PAC's
communications director. They wrote off Landrieu a long time ago,
she adds.
That's only the latest in a pattern of activity that is driving
liberals and Democrats alike up the wall. A growing number are
beginning to wonder if the PAC's abortion rights absolutism is
undermining the Democratic Party's efforts to control Congress.
"Don't get me started about them," one liberal woman activist
recently told me. "They're such purists, it's infuriating."
Former Clinton aide Paul Begala used his platform on CNN's
"Crossfire" earlier this year to tear into Emily's List. "Wasn't it
Santayana who said fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts
after you've lost sight of your aim?" he asked.
You didn't used to hear such griping.
For years, the women behind Emily's List were left-wing folk
heroines. Formed by 35 feminist activists in a basement in 1985,
the PAC has gone on to raise tens of millions for candidates.
That includes over $20 million for the 2002 election, according
to the Center for Responsive Politics. Most of that is in the form
of bundled "hard money" contributions. It lays claim to electing 53
house members and 11 senators, all pro-choice Democratic women.
But in recent years, Emily's List has been instrumental in
turning a number of Democratic primaries into brutal intra-party
slugfests in an effort to get pro-choice women elected.
Meanwhile, moderate Democrats who could use the cash, like
Landrieu, have been scorned.
"The question is, how are you picking your fights?" one
frustrated Democratic strategist told Roll Call. "Are you
picking the right fights?"
For example, Emily's List backed Lynn Rivers over Democratic
lion John Dingell in the fight for Michigan's 15th district.
Dingell won, but only after a fight that pitted labor groups
against feminists.
Harris dismisses the criticism, pointing out that both were
incumbents forced to run against each other due to redistricting.
"More of Lynn Rivers' voters had been put into that district than
Dingell voters," she said. "So there is no reason to think that she
wasn't capable of winning that race."
Maybe, but Emily's List has made a habit of stirring up fights
against candidates backed by organized labor.
It supported Nancy Kaszak over labor-backed Rahm Emanuel in
Illinois's 5th district, a move that helped turn the primary into
the most expensive in state history. Emanuel won the primary (and
later the general election) but only after a campaign where Emily's
List labeled him "anti-worker" -- fighting words in that
blue-collar Chicago district.
It poured money into similar fights in Arizona, West Virginia,
Tennessee, Maine, and in the Michigan and Massachusetts governors'
races.
"Part of what's driving the unions crazy is, because Emily's
List only funds women, they get into these races and they provide
enormous financial resources only to the women candidates even when
the male candidates are more progressive," a Democratic campaign
consultant told the American Prospect magazine.
Another concern for other Democrats is that Emily's List is now
pushing other hard-left issues besides abortion. Its attack on
Dingell was inspired in part by his support for gun rights.
Still, such hardball tactics can win respect, if not love, in
Washington politics. But you have to prove you can deliver when it
counts. Emily's List had a terrible year. When it woke up the
morning after November 5, it found that all three of the Senate
candidates it backed had failed. So did seven of the eight House
candidates it favored in races deemed competitive by the
National Journal.
That gave it a congressional batting average of only .100, the
worst of 20 major political interest groups profiled by the
National Journal. (The National Right to Life
Association's candidates, by contrast, won in three of their five
Senate races and all five of their competitive House races.)
Emily's List did only slightly better in governors' races,
winning three of nine.
"As the president of an organization that does similar things, I
sure as hell wouldn't want to have that kind of record and go back
to my members and ask them for more money," said Stephen Moore,
president of the free market Club for Growth. The club went
head-to-head with Emily's List in 5 races.
Moore claims the group's endorsement is becoming a mixed
blessing for Democrats.
"In some of our ads we actually used Emily's List support
against the candidates. We actually ran ads saying (Indiana
Democratic candidate) Jill Long Thompson cannot possibly call
herself a moderate if she is taking more than $100,000 of Emily's
List money," Moore said. "I think that really hurt her."
Emily's List brushes off all the criticism. Its win-loss record
won't deter it, Harris says.
Its relations with the Democratic Party and other liberal
groups? "More than cordial," Harris said.
She adds: "I would say that there are probably a great number of
Democrats and a lot of people in labor who certainly appreciated
the work that we did with them during the general election."
Mary Landrieu probably isn't one of them.
topics:
Abortion, Law, NATO, Unions