Ned Lamont's primary victory over Joe Lieberman may turn out to be a key
moment in stopping the Bush Administration's destructive policies. But that
depends on what the rest of us do.
Lieberman, as a majority of Connecticut's Democratic voters just
acknowledged, was Bush's fiercest Democratic ally, not just on the Iraqi
war, but on issues from the bankruptcy bill to his regressive energy bill,
tax plans, and judicial nominations, not to mention Terri Schaivo. The
question now is whether Lieberman can hold his seat through a divisive third
party run. Citizens throughout the country can play a crucial role by
pressuring key elected leaders and organizations that initially supported
him to switch their support. Some of this has already begun to occur, with
Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer's strong statements that the Democratic
Senatorial Campaign Committee will fully back Lamont, and Hillary Clinton's
donation of $5,000 from her PAC. But the process needs to be taken still
further.
Though Lieberman's announced that he'll run as a third party candidate, that
isn't set in stone. His chances of splitting the party enough to win in
November or elect a Republican depend on the support he lines up. If it's
only from major corporate and Republican interests, many of whom contributed
to his primary campaign, then voters are far more likely to see him as
merely a Republican stalking horse. According to ABC's George
Stephanopolous, a close Lieberman advisor said that Karl Rove has already
approached his campaign and offered to help. What got Lieberman as close as
he came was the legitimacy that he gained from the backing of key Democratic
leaders like Schumer, Bill Clinton, Chris Dodd, Barbara Boxer, and Barack
Obama, and from institutions like the Connecticut AFL-CIO (though the
state's major teachers unions and the Machinists union backed Lamont), and
from Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the League of Conservation Voters, and the
Human Rights Campaign. They supported him, I believe, because of old
friendships and allegiances, because they didn't expect Lamont to emerge as
such a powerful candidate or his insurgent campaign to touch such a nerve,
and because there's a standard (and problematic) assumption that if an
incumbent is at least somewhat on your side, you give them your automatic
backing even if their opponent is as strong on the relevant issues or
stronger. So National Abortion Rights Action League backed Lieberman despite
his immensely disturbing position that a hospital could refuse emergency
contraceptives to a rape victim and despite his playing a key role, by
blocking any filibuster, in the confirmation of the profoundly anti-choice
Justices Roberts and Alito (who have also been as ghastly as expected on
environmental, social justice and civil liberties issues). It was the
support of institutions and individuals like these that gave Lieberman his
veneer of moderation.
Now, we face a different situation. If anyone who loses a party primary,
even a close one, can simply run on their own, then primaries become
meaningless as ways to democratically elect our leaders. Lamont stressed
from the beginning that he would support Lieberman if he lost and even
campaign with him. Lieberman needs to do the same. The 40 percent statewide
turnout was nearly double the last major contested statewide Democratic
primary, a dozen years ago. Given that Connecticut's Democratic voters have
spoken, Lieberman needs to respect their will, and not split the party by
refusing to accept the will of the voters.
So the challenge is to line up every possible aspect of Democratic and
organizational support behind Lamont-and to strip Lieberman of the resources
and support that got him as close as he came. The initial shifts of
high-profile Democrats are encouraging. But we need to ask more of them.
Their endorsing Lamont matters, as do their financial contributions. But
particularly for those who gave Lieberman credibility by initially backing
and campaigning for him, that's not enough. They need to make clear that
they will visibly and energetically campaign for Lamont as the legitimately
elected representative of their party, and follow through on this commitment
if they can't convince Lieberman to withdraw. It's up to all of us as to
make sure the Democratic leaders who represent us respond.
The same thing's true with liberal organizations that endorsed Lieberman
when Lamont's campaign had yet to coalesce. If we're members or supporters,
we need to personally contact them and ask that they back Lamont and not
Lieberman in this next round. They need to recognize that supporting
Lieberman at this point means supporting the Bush administration, and
everything it stands for.
We might remember that this isn't the first time Lieberman has placed his
career above loyalty to party and beliefs. He also hedged his bets in the
2000 election, by running for reelection as Connecticut Senator while also
running for Vice President. It didn't help the ticket, but worse yet, had
Gore won (as he would have without the Florida machinations), Lieberman
would have had to resign his Senate seat, and be replaced by a Republican
appointed by Republican Governor John Rowland. So Lieberman has a long
history of looking out only for himself, and we might also do our best to
ensure that the media remembers this.
If we're successful enough in our efforts, the wells of support for
Lieberman may dry up sufficiently that he'll decide not to make a serious
third-party race. Or we'll help Lamont gain enough support and momentum to
solidly win. Contributing to Lamont's campaign is important-money matters.
But wherever we live, we now have another task. That's to raise our voices
enough with the elected officials and organizations that represent us, so
that this campaign indeed can indeed become a potential national turning
point.
---
Paul Rogat Loeb is the author of The Impossible Will Take a Little While: A
Citizen's Guide to Hope in a Time of Fear, winner of the 2005 Nautilus Award
for the best book on social change, and Soul of a Citizen See
www.paulloeb.org.
