Freshman Dems not afraid to defy Pelosi on legislation

House Democratic leaders have spent the last two years operating under a singular guiding principle: that it is better to lose Democratic votes on legislation than give up the majority on Election Day.

A group of freshman Democrats seem to have taken note and are exercising that right to oppose Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) at will.

{mosads}Despite all the attention that centrist Blue Dogs and New Democrats have gotten for their willingness to defy their leaders, Reps. Bobby Bright (D-Ala.), Parker Griffith (D-Ala.) and Walt Minnick (D-Idaho) have quietly distinguished themselves for being against just about anything Pelosi is for.

Democrats lost 11 votes on their version of the economic stimulus bill, including those of Reps. Bright, Griffith and Frank Kratovil (D-Md.). When the conference report came back from the Senate, House Democrats won back a number of the elder Blue Dogs they had initially lost — narrowing their total losses to only seven members — but they could not win back the Alabama duo.

When Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) convinced Kratovil to change his vote on the final product, Minnick changed his vote to no.

The trio appears to be following the lead of another young Democrat who is not afraid to challenge his leadership. Rep. Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), a second-term member, opposed Democratic leaders when he was a freshman, including on a high-profile debate on immigration. Last week Shuler ruffled leadership feathers when, in publicly objecting to abortion-related foreign-aid provisions in the omnibus spending bill, he twice referred to the “Democrat leadership” — omitting the “-ic” from word’s end and, in so doing, repeating a refrain used by Republicans to insult Democrats.

“It is an issue,” a Democratic leadership aide said in response to Shuler’s comments. “He is either trying to sound Republican, or he is confused by the Republicans how to refer to us Democrats.”

Yet Pelosi seems to tolerate the behavior. She returned to power this year with an even bigger majority than before, in part because of her willingness to let vulnerable members vote against her when it was necessary for them and it wasn’t going to jeopardize the legislation.

Minnick got off to a very fast start by being the only freshman to cast a vote against the Democratic rules package, which guides the House procedures for the 111th Congress. He hasn’t looked back since.

The Idahoan was joined by Bright and Griffith to cast the only three Democratic votes against the Paycheck Fairness Act, a top priority of the entire leadership team.

Bright and Griffith also cast two of the five total Democratic votes against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The bill passed, but with 40 percent of the Democrats’ internal opposition to another top party priority coming from their freshman class.

And Bright was one of only two Democrats — the other being fourth-term Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.) — to twice this year vote against SCHIP, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act. Both the vote on the original House bill and the adoption of the Senate amendments garnered the support of 40 Republicans.

In fact, the only significant and controversial measure that saw no freshman Democratic defiance was the Feb. 10 privileged resolution from Rep. John Carter (R-Texas) calling for Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) to be stripped of his Ways and Means Committee gavel.

Even larger numbers of freshman Democrats have voted with Republicans on the procedural votes leading up to the final passage of these and other Democratic priorities, as well — a move long ago considered a blatant act of betrayal, according to elder Democrats. Lately that has become far more common from members wanting to protest their leaders without killing or opposing legislation.

Still, the trend for certain freshman Democrats to side with Republicans has not gotten them into any trouble, at least as of yet, with Democratic brass.

Most Democratic leadership aides defended the votes of all of their freshmen, saying members from conservative districts were making important strides to prove to their constituents that they were independent.

But some leadership aides said that not everyone in Pelosi’s leadership team has the same philosophy on how much and what kind of dissent is to be tolerated.

No one was willing to say that certain Democrats — even freshmen, who are more dependent on their leaders to get authorship of bills in order to show their constituents their effectiveness — were breaking understood rules, but some suggested that certain members may be pushing the envelope.

“Certainly there’s an understanding of their need to show their independence,” a Democratic leadership aide said. “But it’s paired with the understanding that by default you’re with the caucus. If for some reason because of your district you can’t be, there’s usually a discussion and at the very least a heads-up.”

Mike Soraghan and Natalee Anderson contributed to this article.