On Monday, Roll Call reported that Sen. [tag]Joe Lieberman[/tag] (I) has little to fear for abandoning his party and rejecting the will of primary voters. The paper reported that “key [tag]Democrats[/tag] aren’t anticipating outward signs of friction between the Connecticut lawmaker and his colleagues,” and there are few if any signs of tension between Lieberman and the caucus (or even within the causus about Lieberman).
The Hill did some digging of its own, however, and reports today that there may be a few problems for the Connecticut senator after all.
A group of Senate Democrats is growing increasingly angry about Sen. Joe [tag]Lieberman[/tag]’s (D-Conn.) campaign tactics since he lost the Democratic primary last week.
If he continues to alienate his colleagues, Lieberman could be stripped of his seniority within the Democratic caucus should he defeat Democrat [tag]Ned Lamont[/tag] in the general election this November, according to some senior Democratic aides.
In recent days, Lieberman has rankled Democrats in the upper chamber by suggesting that those who support bringing U.S. troops home from Iraq by a certain date would bolster terrorists’ planning attacks against the U.S. and its allies. He also sparked resentment by saying last week on NBC’s Today show that the Democratic Party was out of the political mainstream.
The Roll Call piece was apparently based on Lieberman’s immediate actions after last week’s primary, which were troublesome, but not immediately threatening to the national Democratic message. The Hill piece, however, reflects the Dems’ reaction to some of Lieberman’s more offensive comments, and how his strategy hurts more than just Ned [tag]Lamont[/tag].
“I think there’s a lot of concern,” said a senior Democratic aide who has discussed the subject with colleagues. “I think the first step is if the Lieberman thing turns into a side show and hurts our message and ability to take back the Senate, and the White House and the [National Republican Senatorial Committee] manipulate him, there are going to be a lot of unhappy people in our caucus.”
The question then becomes what comes next. Frankly, Lieberman simply may not care.
Let’s say the comments to The Hill were a shot across the bow. Dems want Lieberman to know they’re concerned, and that there may be consequences for his anti-Democratic rhetoric. What’s Lieberman’s motivation to change?
No matter how angry he makes his “friends,” it’s not like the DSCC can withhold campaign support. He could tone down his rhetoric, but he’s far more concerned with his career than helping Dems reclaim a majority in the Senate. Dems can threaten loss of seniority, but Lieberman knows he can simply walk across the aisle and caucus with Republicans if Dems push him too hard.
This is not to say the Dems have no leverage at all. Lieberman wants the party to simply stay out of Connecticut altogether, and focus resources elsewhere. With this in mind, the message from the Dem leadership should simply be: “Joe, if you keep undermining the party, you’ll lose your [tag]seniority[/tag] and we’re making [tag]Connecticut[/tag] a top 2006 priority.”
I believe Dems don’t really have a choice. Lieberman can’t be rewarded for disloyalty.
“Lieberman’s tone and message has shocked a lot of people,” said a second senior Democratic aide who has discussed the issue with other Senate Democrats. “He’s way off message for us and right in line with the White House.”
“At this point Lieberman cannot expect to just keep his seniority,” said the aide. “He can’t run against a Democrat and expect to waltz back to the caucus with the same seniority as before. It would give the view that the Senate is a country club rather than representative of a political party and political movement.”
The more Dems remember that, the better.