by Mark Silva and Ray Long
Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, Majority Whip of the U.S. Senate and one of President-elect Barack Obama's best supporters, was asked today what fellow Democrats should do with that renegate Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, the independent who caucuses with the Democrats but campaigned hard for Republican John McCain.
"Here's the reality,'' Durbin said in an interview today. "The reality is that, at this moment, there are 57 Democratic senators. There are three races still in question--Georgia, Alaska and in Minnesota. And one may require a run-off in December.
"So at the end of the day, we may not have the 60 votes we need to enact measures in the Senate, and we will have to build on what we have. So every vote is important. That's the starting point,'' Durbin said.
"Secondly, despite what Sen. Lieberman did in campaigning for Sen. McCain and speaking at the Republican convention, he has voted with the Democrats an overwhelming percentage of the time,'' the Illinois Democrat noted. "What is going to happen is that we have asked three of our colleagues in the Senate--three Democratic senators, to make a recommendation, actually, it's four senators--to make a recommendation on what should be done with Sen. Lieberman.
"I don't know what the caucus will decide, '' Durbin said, "but we could take it up as early as next week."
Durbin said he would not announce the names of the four senators.
"But there are a variety of options. These are caucus measures. This isn't an ethics investigation. It's a question within the Democratic caucus what--if anything--we'll do, and it will be a caucus decision."
Asked about the consequences or possibility of him losing his committee chairmanship? "Well, I'm troubled by it because, you know, there are many people who worked very hard for the election of Barack Obama and the election of Democrats across the United States, and they're concerned that Sen. Lieberman enjoys all of the benefits of being in the Democratic caucus and didn't show that same level of loyalty.
"There's another side to this equation: We won, and I think we should be... gracious in victory,'' Durbin said. "This isn't a defeat, and I think that's important that that inspires us in terms of what we do."
Comments
Joe Loserman MUST BE stripped of his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs!
Consider what the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs actually does: it's the committee principally responsible for oversight of the executive branch. It's an accountability committee, charged with investigating the conduct of the White House and the president's administration.
As chairman of this committee for the last two years, Lieberman decided NOT to pursue ANY accusations of wrongdoing against the Bush administration. Lieberman's House counterpart -- Rep. Henry Waxman's Oversight Committee -- was a vigilant watchdog, holding hearings, issuing subpoenas, and launching multiple investigations. Lieberman preferred to let his committee do no real work at all. It was arguably the most pathetic display of this Congress.
And yet, now Lieberman acts as if keeping this chairmanship is the single most important part of his public life. Why would he be so desperate to keep the gavel of a committee he hasn't used? I'll let you in on a secret: he wants to start using the power of this committee against Obama.
Lieberman didn't want to hold Bush accountable, but he seems exceedingly anxious to keep the committee that would go after Obama with a vengeance, effectively becoming a Waxman-like figure -- holding hearings, issuing subpoenas, and launching investigations against the Democratic president.
Lieberman doesn't care about "reconciliation," he cares about going after a Democratic administration. Why else would he fight diligently to be chairman of one committee instead of another?
Posted by: BC | November 11, 2008 8:11 PM
Wonder if Durbin is jockeying for Reids job, Durbin would have much better aceptance all around-
Posted by: Inky | November 11, 2008 8:58 PM
Joe Lieberman seems to like being a fought-over tool. How else could this person ever feel important? Is it true Joe Lieberman is a slum lord in addition to being a Dem or a Repug or an Independent senator? Thought I read an article about the Stamford, Conn. rentals he was not keeping up.
Posted by: Vivian | November 11, 2008 10:54 PM
Time to throw Joe down the well.
Posted by: ElliotNC | November 11, 2008 11:15 PM
Joe Lieberman is one or the most upright member of Congress-
For starters- He has a mind of his own-
Posted by: Inky | November 12, 2008 7:31 AM
democrats, where is thou non-partisanship that you are so fond of, at times? Joe Lieberman is a good man, reliably liberal on domestic issues, although a Republican on foreign policy issues. He didn't partake the Obama-ade but most of the time he's going to side up with you. The democrat party machine did not support Him very well in 2006.
You probably won't need Joe Lieberman because you have the two RINOs from Maine, Susan Collins and Olympia Snow, and the RINO from Pa, Arlen Spector. And there's one more guy that will probably be down with you at least 40% of the time. That would be the Az guy, John McCain.
Posted by: Django - N Exile somewhere in/around the 30th Parallel | November 12, 2008 10:19 AM
Lieberman is an INDEPENDENT. Since when are INDEPENDENTs given chairmanships?
I have no problem with Lieberman working for a Republican candidate. Now he's a three-time loser (having lost with Gore and on his own, as well).
Even if he doesn't vote with the Democrats in the future, his vote shouldn't be so valued that the Dems lose perspective. If the Dems need Lieberman's vote on any particular issue, then they will not be acting in a bi-partisan manner - which is what they said they would do.
So strip Joe of his power and work with the Republicans in a way that makes sense. If the Republicans filibuster sensible legislation, take it to the public - that's the power of the Bully Pulpit.
Posted by: Truth be Told | November 12, 2008 3:06 PM