The Trouble with Leiberman
Find a Conversation
| Thu, 11-06-2008 - 5:37pm |
Have the Democrats already started playing "You're either with us or against us."?
Joseph I. Lieberman's future with Senate Democrats still hung in the balance Thursday after he met with Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Lieberman, the Democrat-turned-independent senator from Connecticut, later said he and Reid are going to take a few days to mull his next steps within the Democratic caucus.
"It was a very good conversation between two colleagues and friends," Lieberman said of his 45-minute discussion in Reid's office.
"Today Senator Lieberman and I had the first of what I expect to be several conversations. No decisions have been made," said Reid.
Lieberman was elected as an independent in 2006 after losing a Democratic primary. He continued to caucus and vote with the Democrats, however, except for issues relating to the war in Iraq. On that front, he has been decidedly aligned with the GOP.
Lieberman made the biggest waves when he endorsed Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for president and campaigned against President-elect Barack Obama.
"While I understand that Senator Lieberman has voted with Democrats a majority of the time, his comments and actions have raised serious concerns among many in our caucus," Reid said in a statement following the meeting.
"I expect there to be additional discussions in the days to come, and Senator Lieberman and I will speak to our caucus in two weeks to discuss further steps," he said.
Senators are expected to meet the week of Nov. 17.
Democratic leaders have a few options when it comes to dealing with Lieberman. Many party aides say that the most likely scenario would involve stripping Lieberman of his Homeland Security and Government Affairs gavel. He could keep seniority on his current committees and perhaps be given a subcommittee chairmanship.
Most doubt that he will be booted from the party, however. Lieberman's vote has been valuable on domestic issues, which lawmakers will be focusing on in the 111th Congress. Furthermore, the Senate's Democratic majority is still uncertain; three elections are still undecided -- and may remain undecided for weeks -- so it's unclear how close Reid will be to the 60 votes needed to prevent a filibuster.
Lieberman could always decide to extricate himself from the Democrats altogether, though few think it would do him any good to caucus with the Republicans. Nevertheless, one GOP Senate aide said that there was some talk among members about reaching out to Lieberman.
In recent days, Lieberman has pledged to work with Obama and the Democrats, a promise he reiterated today.
"This election is over and I agree with President-elect Obama that we must now unite to get our economy going again," he said.
Like Lieberman and Reid, Connecticut Democratic Senator Christopher J. Dodd was tight-lipped about Lieberman's future in the Democratic caucus, but indicated he had been talking regularly with Lieberman in recent days about the issue and planned to continue to do so. Dodd declined to comment on the nature of those conversations.
"I've talked to Joe this morning very briefly," he said. "I know he's had some conversations with others...Joe and I have known each either a long time. We've worked together a long time. So I am going to speak to him later today and tomorrow as well and we'll follow up with the conversations we've had already, but I don't have anything further to say at this point."

Pages
This is not about Lieberman's presence in the caucus.
Interesting to know this since we don't usually hear this kind of stuff on the news.
I don't think that anyone that actually lives in the state of CT has voiced and opinion yet. I live in CT, I actually voted for Lieberman. I voted for him at the time because he made promises, even running as an independent, that he would uphold the "democratic" beliefs and speak for us, his constituents, in a way that we would admire and be proud of. I voted for him for just these reasons, believing that he would represent ME in the way he promised.
In 2006 almost immediately after getting elected the very FIRST thing he did was threaten that he was going to shake off his "independent" status and go to the GOP, thus giving them the majority at that time in history. To say that the state of CT was shocked and stunned is an understatement. CT is a blue state, it has been a blue state for as long as I can remember. Lieberman made promises about sticking with the democrats in order to get elected and within WEEKS of going back to DC was changing his position so quickly that the entire state suffered from whiplash.
Of course that didn't happen and Lieberman stayed an independent... but with very obvious republican leanings in many ways. I can tell you that the majority of the state of CT was not happy with this but not much we could do really and nothing to get in a huff about. Then Lieberman at the RNC endorsed McCain and denounced Obama and I felt betrayed... and I know that almost all of my friends, neighbors, and associates felt the same way. It was a slap in the face to those of us that voted for him.
So personally, YES, I think that something needs to be done. I don't think it's right to betray your constituency in that way and have it be A-Okay. I'm not looking for "revenge" per se, but I do think that our elected officials that are put into office by US owe us the respect of honoring OUR wishes and our beliefs.
Pages