Predatory pricing laws protect consumers

The Florida Times-Union reports that a front group for Wal-Mart known as the Coalition for Lower Gas Prices is pushing for repeal of a state law banning the practice of predatory pricing by gasoline retailers. http://tinyurl.com/phx4q A visit to the web site for the Coalition indicated a similar effort has been launched in Wisconsin to rescind a similar state law. Predatory pricing laws protect consumers because they help to assure fair competition. A huge corporation like Wal-Mart has the capability to destroy competitors by pricing certain products below cost and is then is free to raise prices once they control the market. Florida Governor Jeb Bush endorsed the Wal-Mart sponsored legislation introduced by State Senator Nancy Argenziano as an attempt to bring "the forces of the free market" to provide relief to Floridians at the gasoline pump. I agree that if enacted the law might temporarily give Florida residents a break from higher gas prices but what about the long term when a few gasoline retailers are able to destroy their competitors and dominate the market ? Of course, big business and free market idealogues like the Cato Insitute will argue that any government regulation is bad and predatory pricing laws hurt consumers. If the big business lobbies get their way, consumers are likely to pay less for a while and then have little choice but to accept higher prices later. http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/

Welcome Blue Dog Blog !

I would like to welcome the Blue Dog Blog to the blogosphere. This new blog is the result of a long time discussion with the Blue Dog Moderate Yahoo Group for a stronger web presence to make the voice of moderate and conservative Democrats heard. I plan to contribute to Blue Dog Blog from time to time and hope that other mainstream Democratic bloggers will consider doing so as well. Check out the Blue Dog Blog at http://bluedogdemocrat.org/blog/.

The DLC, the Moveonners and the Blue Dogs: Which direction for Democrats ?

The Democratic Leadership Council has some great policy ideas at times and I agree with the basic premise of their political strategy that Democrats must appeal to the vital center by stressing concern about national security and mainstream social values. I have no problem with adopting good ideas regardless of where they come from - the DLC or the Moveonner wing. That being said, I do strongly disagree with the DLC's continued support of free trade and alliance with big business interests generally. My vision for the Democratic Party is one of moderation on social issues (with an open door to a variety of social views) and economic populism.

Aligning ourselves with the Moveonner wing would have its problems as well. Modern day progressive Democrats are often out of touch with or contemptuous of mainstream values especially anything having to do with the traditional family, religious faith or patriotism. I can find a great deal of common ground with progressives in terms of an activist role by government, economic policy and support for organized labor, but find many would prefer to stress differences over a few social issues.

As for Blue Dogs, I think that many of us in the grassroots who indentify ourselves with the coalition are socially conservative to moderate combined with populist economic views. There are differing schools of thought among Blue Dogs though. Some Blue Dogs are of a more libertarian, Jeffersonian Democrat bent and others may be conservative or centrist across the board. Blue Dogs may be descendants of New Deal Democrats, Dixiecrats, Scoop Jackson Democrats, Prairie Populists and a number of other variations. Blue Dogs are diverse in terms of geography, socio-economic backgrounds, religion and race. Being a Blue Dog may represent more of a state of mind than any one political philosophy. Basically, we all agree that Democrats need to learn from past failures and find a way to connect with red America.