In the late 2010s and early 2020s, the Coalition's focus shifted towards ideological centrism and pragmatic, constituency-based politics;[2][1] however, the Coalition maintained an emphasis on fiscal responsibility.[11] The Blue Dog Coalition remains the most conservative grouping of Democrats in the House.[10] As of 2023, the caucus has ten members.[12]
The Blue Dog Coalition was formed in 1995[13][14][15] during the 104th Congress to give members from the Democratic Party representing conservative-leaning districts a unified voice after the Democrats' loss of Congress in the 1994Republican Revolution.[16]
The term "Blue Dog Democrat" is credited to Texas Democratic Representative Pete Geren (who later joined the George W. Bush administration). Geren opined that the members had been "choked blue" by Democrats on the left.[17] It is related to the political term "Yellow Dog Democrat", a reference to Southern Democrats said to be "so loyal they would even vote for a yellow dog before they would vote for any Republican". The term also refers to the "Blue Dog" paintings of Cajun artist George Rodrigue of Lafayette, Louisiana as the original members of the coalition would regularly meet in the offices of Louisiana representatives Billy Tauzin and Jimmy Hayes, both of whom later joined the Republican Party – both also had Rodrigue's paintings on their walls.[18][19] An additional explanation for the term cited by members is "when dogs are not let into the house, they stay outside in the cold and turn blue", a reference to the Blue Dogs' belief they had been left out of a party that they believed had shifted to the political left.[20] At one time, first-term Blue Dogs were nicknamed 'Blue Pups'.[18] Starting in the twenty-first century, the caucus began shifting its ideology and began adopting more socially liberal stances in order align more closely with mainstream Democratic Party political values.[2]
Disputes within the Democratic Party
In 2007, 15 Blue Dogs in safe seats rebelled, and refused to contribute party dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. An additional 16 Blue Dogs did not pay any money to the DCCC, but were exempt from party-mandated contributions because they were top GOP targets for defeat in 2008. One reason for the party-dues boycott was contained in remarks made by Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California, encouraging leaders of anti-war groups to field primary challenges to any Democrat who did not vote to end the war in Iraq. Woolsey later stated that she was misunderstood, but the Blue Dogs continued the boycott. Donations to party congressional committees are an important source of funding for the party committees, permitting millions of dollars to be funneled back into close races.[21]
Role in the passage of the ACA
In the summer of 2009, The Economist said the following regarding the Blue Dog Coalition: "The debate over health care ... may be the pinnacle of the group's power so far." The Economist quoted Charlie Stenholm, a founding Blue Dog, as stating that "This is the first year for the new kennel in which their votes are really going to make a difference".[22] In July 2009, Blue Dog members who were committee members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee successfully delayed the House vote on the Health Insurance Reform Bill (HR3200) until after the summer recess.[23][24] It was during this recess that the term 'Obamacare' was first derisively adopted by Republicans on Capitol Hill.[25] Blue Dog opposition to a potential "public option" within Obamacare, together with the contentious town hall meetings faced by House members during the 2009 summer recess, gave the healthcare law's Republican opponents an opportunity to attack the "public option" and get it removed from the bill.[26][27][28]
The Washington Post stated that the Blue Dogs, with over 50 members, were the most influential voting bloc in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010.[29]
2010s decline
The Blue Dog Coalition suffered serious losses in the 2010 midterm elections, losing over half of its seats to Republican challengers. Its members, who were roughly one quarter of the Democratic Party's caucus in the 111th Congress, accounted for half of the party's midterm election losses.[30] Including retirements, Blue Dog numbers in the House were reduced from 59 members in 2009 to 26 members in 2011.[31] Two of the Coalition's four leaders (Stephanie Herseth Sandlin and Baron Hill) failed to secure re-election.[32][33]
In the 2016 elections, future Blue Dogs accounted for over half of the Democrats' gains in the House.[36] In 2018, for the first time since 2006, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee partnered with the Blue Dog PAC (the Blue Dog Coalition's political organization) to recruit candidates in competitive districts across the country.[37] After the 2018 House of Representatives elections, the caucus grew from 18 members to 24.[31] All incumbents were re-elected and Rep. Kyrsten Sinema was elected to the U.S. Senate from Arizona.[38] The caucus also added 11 new members who defeated Republican incumbents in the 2018 election in districts that had voted for Donald Trump in 2016.[39]
Biden presidency
The Democratic Party lost seats in the 2020 and 2022 House of Representatives elections, including the Blue Dog Coalition. As of July 2023, during the 118th Congress, the Coalition had 10 members.[40]
At the start of the 118th Congress in January 2023, six of the expected 15 members of the Coalition departed following after a failed attempt to rename the group to the Common Sense Coalition. Freshman representative Don Davis, who was expected to join the Blue Dogs, also chose not to do so.[12] After this split, the group reorganized and began an effort to stabilize, rebuild, and maintain influence on policy proposals in the closely divided 118th Congress.[41] The effort included a recruitment drive which prompted Mary Peltola (AK-AL), Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez (WA-03), and Wiley Nickel (NC-13) to join, bringing the number of members back up to 10.[42] Under the leadership of Peltola, Perez, and Representative Jared Golden, the caucus shifted its focus towards ideological centrism and pragmatic, constituency-based (especially rural and working-class) politics.[1]
Ideology
The Blue Dog Coalition is the most conservative grouping of Democrats in the House. It "advocates for fiscal responsibility, a strong national defense and bipartisan consensus rather than conflict with Republicans". It acts as a check on legislation that its members perceive to be too far to the right or to the left on the political spectrum.[11] In the 2010s, the Blue Dogs became more demographically diverse and less conservative.[2]
The Blue Dog Coalition is often involved in searching for a compromise between liberal and conservative positions, including classically liberal policies. Most of its members represent competitive swing districts, and are thus inclined to appeal to swing voters.[43] Though its members have evolved on social issues over time,[31] the group has never taken a position on social issues as a caucus.[2] As of 2014, there was no mention of social issues in the official Blue Dog materials.[44]
In the early years of the caucus, the Blue Dogs were viewed by some as the political successors to Southern Democratic groups known such as the Boll Weevils or conservative coalition.[45][46] The Boll Weevils may, in turn, be considered the descendants of the Dixiecrats and the "states' rights" Democrats of the 1940s through the 1960s, and even the Bourbon Democrats of the late 19th century.[47]
In January 2019, McClatchy reported a transformation of the Blue Dogs from a coalition of 'southern white men' to 'a multi-regional, multicultural group.' At that time, the coalition included two African-American members, one Vietnamese-American, one Mexican-American, and only five members from Southern states.[31]
As of July 2023, the Coalition included 10 members. At that point, the Coalition's membership was smaller than it had ever been since its formation.[12][43]
^Kane, Paul (January 15, 2014). "Blue Dog Democrats, whittled down in number, are trying to regroup". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 16, 2014. Retrieved July 23, 2014. Four years ago, they were the most influential voting bloc on Capitol Hill, more than 50 House Democrats pulling their liberal colleagues to a more centrist, fiscally conservative vision on issues such as health care and Wall Street reforms.
