On an emotional level, the chasm between U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman and the Connecticut Democratic Party is completely understandable. On a pragmatic level, it’s not.
Two years after he was cast aside by anti-war Democrats, the gap between Lieberman and the party he once called home, widens every day. Many Democrats openly hope their party gains a wider majority in the U.S. Senate in this year’s elections, not because they want greater control over the agenda, but because they long for Lieberman’s irrelevance.
When the left wing of the party decided to make an example of Lieberman by backing Ned Lamont in 2006, it made the mistake of believing he would quietly retire, disgraced for standing up for what he believes in. What they ended up with was a stronger Lieberman, returned to the Senate as an “independent Democrat” who effectively controls the fate of the majority with a three-sided party affiliation card.
After winning reelection, Lieberman promised he could “forgive, but would never forget” how he was treated. If it sounded too magnanimous to be true, it was. Since then, he seems to have relished every opportunity he has been given to remind his old friends what a mistake they made. As he campaigns for John McCain, opening the Republican National Convention, he is thoroughly enjoying his immunity from Democratic persecution.
Political Impurity
Hard-core Democrats say their displeasure with Lieberman predates the war in Iraq. They claim the war was simply the last count in a multiple-count indictment charging political impurity. It stems from his first days in the Senate when he began to move toward the center — and even to the right on some issues — raising his own profile at the expense of the Democratic agenda.
The purity argument seems empty in the politics of today. For years, successful candidates have run from party labels. Office holders look for opportunities to show their post-partisan approach. The two major party candidates for president this year have based their campaigns on the notion they can rise above Democratic vs. Republican gridlock.
Connecticut Republicans can teach Democrats a lesson or two about learning to live with ideologically impure, yet winning candidates. For years, the hard-core right of the Connecticut Republican Party has grudgingly gone along with Lowell Weicker, Chris Shays, John Rowland and now Jodi Rell. Weicker claims his loss to Lieberman in 1988 was the result of a conservative backlash, but other than that, there’s never been a serious attempt by Republicans to sanction their own.
Give Peace A Chance
Lieberman’s political future now seems tied to McCain. If his brother-in-arms wins the White House, there will almost certainly be a place for Lieberman — who, let’s face it — has done more for McCain than most Republicans. If McCain loses, and Democrats widen their majority in the Senate, Lieberman may face retaliation by Senate leadership, but his bigger worry would be back home, where Democrats and Republicans would see a chance to beat him, if he were to run again as an Independent.
As far-fetched as it seems, a more pragmatic approach for Democrats and Lieberman, would be to make peace. Lieberman is 95 percent Democrat. If he runs as an Independent, he and his old party may lose. As a Democrat, he would almost certainly win. The animosity is so deep Lieberman can’t make the first move. The peace process begins with the suggestion from someone like Chris Dodd or John Larson that, “in his heart, Joe is one of us.” Both sides of this feud have learned lessons in loyalty. Now, they should reconsider their mutual interests.
Dean Pagani is a former gubernatorial advisor. He is V.P. of Public Affairs for Cashman and Katz Integrated Communications in Glastonbury.
