Matt Stoller has written an important post trying to figure out why Congressional Democrats lose every important fight.

As we map DC as a social network, we are beginning to understand that it is not the number of Democrats in office that moves legislative priorities, it is the density of the connections between progressive office-holders and their supporters relative to the density of the connections between conservatives and their supporters.  Christunity at Swing State Project has an excellent diary, which shows that this Congress is actually more progressive than the 1992-1994 Congress Clinton had to work with.  Yet, this Congress has done a whole lot less than they did to pass progressive legislation, probably because the conservative networks are far denser today.  In 1993, Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich organized a filibuster of Clinton's health care plan, along with the business right.  Today, filibusters are so routine that the Senate has more than 70 bills pending that are held up by a Republican filibuster.  The networks Gingrich used have solidified into almost uniform party unity, whereas on the progressive side there is very little holding Democrats together.

There's no question Democrats are more diverse and more divided than Republicans. And the reason is pretty simple: Republicans in Congress are all rich whites who want to keep their wealth away from the non-rich and/or non-white voters who elect Democrats.

Rich white Republicans in Congress don't need anyone to organize them, they easily organize themselves to protect their wealth.

Congressional Democrats, on the other hand, come from a wide range of backgrounds and have little in common, either ideologically or personally.

On important votes, they need to be "whipped" into line. And that's the job of the House Majority Leader, working with the Democratic Whip.

Unfortunately the present House Majority Leader, Steny Hoyer, is devoted to protecting the handful of rich whites who are elected as Democrats and join the BlueDogs or the DLC because they are just as terrified of non-rich and/or non-white voters as Republicans.

Democrats will never win any important fights unless they are willing to articulate progressive positions and dig in their heels over them. Otherwise Democrats will always be dragged to the right by Republicans who dig in their heels on every issue and vote in lockstep.

The place where progressive positions would normally originate is in the Progressive Caucus, which  is much larger than the BlueDogs and the DLC. But they don't exercise their power because their leadership and their membership are simply too weak - not in numbers, but in determination.

The Progressive Caucus could have insisted that Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer cut all funds for Iraq except to bring our troops safely home. But it didn't.

The Progressive Caucus could have insisted that Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer instruct John Conyers to begin impeachment hearings. But it didn't.

The Progressive Caucus could have insisted that Steny Hoyer resign as Majority Leader after repeatedly betraying Democratic on issues like warrantless wiretapping. But it didn't.

The Progressive Caucus could have insisted that Democrats apply the "majority of the majority" rule created by Tom DeLay which only allowed legislation to move if a majority of Republicans supported it. But it didn't.

So it's not sufficient to elect more Democrats, even progressive Democrats like the current members of the Progressive Caucus.

And it's not sufficient to elect reformist Democrats like Darcy Burner whose "Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq," while addressing many important issues, doesn't cut funds - the only action that will actually "End the War in Iraq."

The only way to move Congress to the left - and thereby make it possible for Democrats to win key battles - is:

1. to support "aggressive progressive" Democrats like Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler who will fight for progressive causes even when those causes (like impeachment) are scorned on the editorial page of the Washington Post and on the front page of DailyKos.

2. to elect more "aggressive progressive" Democrats like Kucinich and Wexler.