Hey Hey Ho Ho, Trent Lott Has Got To Go
Jeffords just the latest fiasco
by Joe Giardiello
Someone came up with a saying some time ago. I
think it went something like, "Three Strikes, You’re Out." Apparently
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott is a little weak on his baseball (or
modern crime fighting) colloquialisms. A little weak in the leadership
department also, if the current direction of the U.S. Senate is any
indication.
Ah, remember with me if you will the halcyon days of yesteryear when
we actually talked about a veto-proof majority in the Senate. The House
may be a dead heat as far as numbers go, but it was the Senate that
could be reliably expected to remain in Republican hands. It would be
the bulwark against any eventual Democratic takeover of the House.
Indeed, 60 Republican senators didn’t seem all that out of reach.
But then Trent came to bat. Either it was fate, crafty Democrats or
maybe just dumb luck that blew three fast balls over the plate that is
Senator Trent Lott.
And we’re not talking little strikes on Lott’s part here, either. If
it was a matter of Lott’s affinity for saying the wrong thing at the
wrong time or some other minor misstep, that could be forgiven. Lott,
you will recall, allowed, in the early days of the 2000 presidential
campaign, a gun-control bill to come to the floor that was tied 50-50.
This gave Vice President Al Gore the opportunity to "look Presidential"
by riding into the Senate on his white horse and break the tie. Then
there was Lott’s appeal to the military to "get real" during the Kelly
Flinn Air Force affair. Slip ups like these have been all but forgotten.
Of course this isn’t about Lott’s ability to be a good Senator. He
has arguably done a laudable job representing his constituents in
Mississippi. His voting record was solidly conservative before he became
Majority Leader. Lott has received universal praise for his ability to
play the inside game. You could even argue it’s the Senate Majority
Leaders job to maintain the facade of neutrality on many issues.
But Trent Lott has shown a remarkable inability to get things done in
the U.S. Senate as the lead Republican. Take a look at just a small part
of the Lott record (and let’s keep it to the last six months – we only
have a limited amount of time),
Strike 1
Trent Lott took over the Senate in 1996 with a 55-45 edge. Now, after
just three election cycles with Lott in control of the Republican
caucus, the split stands at 50-50.
In just the last two election cycles Republicans have lost such
institutional names as William Roth of Delaware (while the Republican
at-large congressman was coasting to a 37-point victory), Washington’s
Slade Gorton and New York’s Al D’Amato (remember Alfonse?) in addition
to first-termers such as Rod Grams of Minnesota.
If it was a nationwide trend it would almost be tempting to say there
was little the Republican leadership could do about it. Too bad for Lott
there is the junior senator from Pennsylvania, Rick Santorum. While Bush
went on to lose Pennsylvania, Santorum ran away with a race that was
almost universally expected to be one the best chances for a Democratic
pickup.
So while a Republican was winning the White House, incumbent
Republican Senators were dropping like flies.
But election losses are not the only weak spot of Team Lott.
Strike 2
The new President’s tax cut is arguably the most important vote that
will be cast during the entire Bush Presidency – the defining vote of
the early Bush days. It is what every following major vote will be
compared to in the next four years. This is more than just your average
tax-cut vote. Yet even then, Lott couldn’t keep the Republicans in line.
Now, with a compromise deal all ready to be voted on, Lott stares
into the cameras, stunned, absolutely stunned, that Democrats would
attempt to delay the budget vote.
Even though the tax cut winds up being a still staggering $1.35
trillion, the media has dedicated considerable coverage to the fact it
wasn’t the $1.6 trillion Bush said was "was just right" during the
campaign. So even in victory, Republicans are the losers again. The
Democrats protected the elderly, those damn children and social
security.
Strike 3
Now comes the case of Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords. As of this
writing the conventional wisdom seems to say Jeffords intends to defect
– or at least declare himself an independent. For my money, I’m voting
on the independent route. A man who has lived his life almost devoid of
principles clearly belongs somewhere in that hazy netherworld.
Then he can delay changing the leadership in the Senate for a few
months and get some more press time while the world ponders how he'll
vote in Senate organization. Yup, Mr. Jeffords will really enjoy his 15
minutes then.
Some good may come out of a Jeffords’ defection after all. It may
give the Republicans in the Senate the shove they need to change
leadership.
It has been said Jeffords and Lott are good friends. Maybe Jeffords
and his new friends will allow Lott to stay on as leader. That way he
can
sell out the Democrats for a change.