Progressive Flight from Teague on Health Care?

By: Daniel Balke

Las Cruces area progressives have threatened to withhold support from Congressman Harry Teague over the first-term Democrat’s decision to buck his party and vote “no” in the U.S. House of Representatives’ historic passage of health care reform legislation on Sunday night. Many are frustrated by Teague’s refusal to stand with President Obama in the latter’s hour of greatest need. And while they will happily cast their vote for Democratic Lieutenant Governor Diane Denish in her bid to become New Mexico’s first female governor, they will leave their ballot blank on the U.S. House line in order to protest Teague’s progressive credentials.

This would be misguided for several reasons. First, refusing to vote for Teague is effectively the same thing as voting for Steve Pearce, Teague’s Republican opponent in the November election and a former three-term Congressman from New Mexico’s Second District. The race between Teague and Pearce is expected to be one of the country’s closest and most competitive in the 2010 mid-term elections. In other words, every vote matters. By withholding their electoral support from Teague, progressives would greatly help the cause of one of President George W. Bush’s strongest Congressional allies, who has cozied up to Tea Party activists and vigorously opposed measures close to the progressive heart, including financial regulatory reform, climate change legislation, and, of course, the recently-passed health care bill.

Second, Teague has reliably supported progressive causes. He backed the President’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), voted in favor of climate change legislation that would cap carbon emissions, and has routinely pushed for increased investment in clean, renewable energy technologies in which New Mexico has a comparative advantage, such as solar and wind. Far from a Republican stalwart, moreover, Teague has voted with Democrats 88% of the time, and his occasional unwillingness to vote with the majority has never sunk a major piece of legislation, including Sunday night’s health care vote, which passed with a three vote cushion. The track record is clear: Teague has either voted for, or at least not stood in the way of, progressive initiatives.

Third, a victory for Teague in the upcoming election would give him a freer hand to support progressive causes in future. Today’s political climate is extremely difficult for Democrats, and the Republicans are expected to make big gains in the upcoming mid-terms. Moreover, in Pearce, Teague faces a well-financed politician with wide name recognition and an established electoral base owing to his six years representing the Second District in Washington. In other words, it is unlikely that Teague will ever face a more challenging reelection battle than the way he faced this year. If he triumphs, it is difficult to imagine a Republican challenger unseating him in the near- or medium-term. Such job security would provide Congressman Teague greater ability to support measures more in-line with progressive thinking.

Progressives are understandably frustrated over the centrist line Harry Teague has walked since coming to Congress in January 2009, particularly his refusal to back President Obama’s landmark health care legislation. However, refusing to support Teague in November would provide critical support to conservative Steve Pearce in an election that could be decided by a razor thin margin. Paradoxically, Teague’s success in November depends in large measure on strong turn-out amongst progressive voters, who have now threatened to sit on the electoral sidelines. For those who support a more progressive future for New Mexico’s Second Congressional District, the best move at this point would be to bite their lip and cast a vote for Harry Teague.