There was a time when progressivism meant something in the United States. A whole period of U.S. political history is known by many as the “Progressive Era”. Many reform-minded individuals stood up for the whistle-blowers, and championed government accountability. Such figures sought a redress in personal liberty where it was lacking for large segments of the U.S. population. Extolling the virtues of American heritage and culture was also comon among reformers early in the twentieth century. These reformers were often for the rights of labor without opposing the core interests of the business class. Classically, progressives trumpeted the safety of the country over efforts at protecting wayward politicians and secondary agendas at national expense. President Theodore Rossevelt comes to mind when discussing these many values of good governance. He even sought unsuccessfully a presidential term on behalf of the Progressive Party in 1912. Though, modern progressives seem to lack these strong principles of good governance they once held.

Secretary of State Clinton, when she sought the Democratic nomination in 2008, characterized herself as a progressive in the mold of Theodore Roosevelt. However, her campaign stance on illegal immigration demonstrates that her ideology is distant from that of the first President Roosevelt. The Secretary of State’s position on gun control similarly suggests stark differences between her views and those of the man for whom the Teddy Bear is named.

Nonetheless, as a movement, modern progressivism seems to have lost its way. Those today describing themselves to be progressive in political matters aren’t calling out the Obama White House on its clear breaches of ethical conduct. Gideon D’Assandro recalls, in his latest blog post, the underreported scandal over the suppressed EPA report detailing the weaknesses in justification for the present debate over the Waxman-Markley climate bill. The Obama administration has similarly taken action against a whistle blower in another government agency, the Corporation for National and Community Service, who came forward exposing the misuse of funds by an Obama supporter in California. The use of lobbyists to fill key positions throughout the federal government despite campaign promises to the contrary should also be receiving the persistent ire of progressives. Promises of transparency, another hallmark of progressive governance, has been largely dismissed by the current administration despite its claims and intentions to the contrary.

Democrats risk credibility with the electorate for these and other reasons. While the leftward current in much of Congress at the moment is also influencing the polls, one cannot easily dispute that the double standards of the Obama administration have taken their toll. Without a careful reevaluation of how the current administration and Congress have governed, the President and his allies risk doing in four years what his predecessor did in eight. Indeed, in earlier times, progessive politicians stood for ideas bigger than themselves; now, they stand for self-aggrandizement. They have become what so many campaigned against in 2006 and 2008.

Last 5 posts by James Kane

• A November to Remember - November 8th, 2010
• On hope and fear - October 18th, 2010
• Expecting Different Results - September 12th, 2010
• A glaring omission on Iraq - August 31st, 2010
• Employing a losing strategy - August 7th, 2010