Apparently, Trent Lott can see what the impeachment process is doing to the Republican Party.
washingtonpost.com
Lott's Survival Strategy
Avoiding Long Trial And Losses in 2000
By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 1, 1999; Page A20
In floating a trial balloon aimed at bringing a swift conclusion to
impeachment proceedings, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.)
has embarked on a risky political path that has already provoked the
Republican right.
Lott is gambling that it is worth angering hard-line House members, his
party's conservative wing and Republican activists in his home state in
order to protect vulnerable GOP senators facing tough reelection fights in
2000, according to both Republicans and Democrats involved in the
process.
Critics of Lott's still tentative decision said it would allow President Clinton
to avoid a lengthy Senate trial and the embarrassment of direct testimony
by Monica S. Lewinsky and others, preventing an opportunity to make a
more convincing case to the public of Clinton's culpability and the
legitimacy of removing him from office.
Lott remained in seclusion from the press and his aides had little to say
about the rationale of his impeachment strategy. Others, however, were
not so reticent.
"This is very discouraging," said Clark Reed, a driving force in building the
Mississippi GOP over the past 3 1/2 decades and a close associate of
Lott's. "Frankly, I'm torn my own self as to which way to raise hell."
Connie Cochran, executive director of the Mississippi Republican Party,
said many voters have called headquarters to complain that because of
Lott there may be no full-scale examination of the charges against Clinton.
Gary Bauer, head of the conservative Family Research Council,
simultaneously criticized Lott while giving an indirect boost to his own
prospective GOP presidential bid: "I've been concerned overall about a
lack of leadership in the party for some time now. I think the vacuum left
by Ronald Reagan has never been filled both in commitment to ideas and in
courage in pushing against the tide."
In Lott's political calculus, however, the irritation of Bauer and Reed are
far outweighed by the need to protect the reelection prospects of such
GOP senators as Rod Grams (Minn.), John D. Ashcroft (Mo.), Rick
Santorum (Pa.), Spencer Abraham (Mich.) and James M. Jeffords (Vt.).
Partisans on both sides of the aisle pointed out that these and a number of
other Republican senators up in 2000 face reelection in states where
Democratic challengers could capitalize on impeachment proceedings.
"He is acting in behalf of his most immediate constituency, his 55
Republican senators. He is acting as leader of his own party," a senior
Democratic Senate aide said. In the states likely to have close races for
GOP incumbents, "this [impeachment] is not a popular position with
general election voters."
The aide contended that conservatives and strong Republican partisans
"can't hold a grudge when at the end of the day you have some vote that a
member will be accountable for."
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), incoming chairman of the Rules
Committee, defended Lott. "He views his role here as majority leader of
the whole Senate," McConnell said. "Almost no one is viewing this as a
partisan exercise."
In fact, one Senate source close to the negotiations over impeachment
proceedings contended that one of Lott's goals is to prevent a repetition of
the kind of battle that turned impeachment into a partisan war in the House:
"He looked back on the House and said, 'There but for the grace of God
go we.' We have other business to conduct and the Senate is a very
personal place. If a bitter partisan divide is implanted in the Senate, it's
very tough to dislodge and no business can get done."
Not all impeachment hawks were critical of Lott. GOP pollster Bill
McInturff said: "It's simple. In the Senate, it takes a two-thirds vote. If
there is never going to be a two-thirds vote, then there is a calculation just
how long do you want to pursue [a trial to remove Clinton from office]. If it
was just a majority vote in the Senate, we would be having a very different
conversation."
When Lott became majority leader in March 1996, he signaled the start of
a sober, non-confrontational period. "In '95, we were new, we were
exuberant, we were excited, maybe a little out of control," he said. "Now,
everything is different. . . . We are not going to look for a reason to fight.
We're going to look for a way to get things done."
This kind of thinking has continued, influencing his current posture on the
impeachment proceedings in the view of a number of people. One
Democrat noted, "Lott has been the one who had to deal with the
catastrophes wrought by the House, beginning with the government
shutdowns. His solution was to make deals and pass legislation."
In this assessment, Lott's emphasis on passing legislation in 1996 to
counter the image of the GOP generated by the 1995-96 government
shutdowns was crucial to Republican success in holding their House
majority.
A Republican familiar with Lott's thinking said, "He is not inclined to blow
up the place over this [impeachment]. It's not in the Senate's interest or in
the party's interest to do that."
For Lott, the crucial political test will be working out the details of an
impeachment proceedings strategy that can win majority support from the
Republican caucus. Few believe he would try to impose rules governing
the trial with just a minority of Republicans allied with the 45 Democrats.
But a number of sources yesterday noted that prospects for getting a
majority of GOP senators to agree to his plan look reasonably good. They
pointed out that only a small number of senators have staked out hard-line
positions demanding a full scale trial, suggesting that Lott may not
encounter intractable opposition.
Staff writers Helen Dewar and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report.
© Copyright 1999 The Washington Post Company |
