From Roll Call (subscription only), we learn that Joe Lieberman may get to keep his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs.
With President-elect Obama’s fingerprints seemingly everywhere, momentum appears to be building among Senate Democrats to let Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) keep his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.
“The overall atmosphere is toward reconciliation,” said one Lieberman supporter, who noted that Obama “has in a large sense set the tone” by calling for Lieberman to remain a member of the Senate Democratic Conference.
Yet, it seems likely that Lieberman will suffer some form of punishment.
However, Democrats still say they are exploring options for penalizing Lieberman in other ways for his disloyalty to the party during the 2008 election cycle. Those options might include stripping him of two plum subcommittee chairmanships, or taking away his membership on either the Armed Services or Environment and Public Works panels.
Lieberman’s two subcommittee chairs are on the Armed Services’ Subcommittee on Airland and the Environment & Public Works’ Subcommittee on Private Sector and Consumer Solutions to Global Warming and Wildlife Protection. Stripping him of one or both of these chairs would be something, but not much. The biggest concern I have about Joe Lieberman is something I haven’t seen anyone else talking about. Take a look at the Democratic seniority list of the full Armed Services committee.
Member Name
Carl Levin (D-MI) [Chair]
Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA)
Robert C. Byrd (D-WV)
Joseph I. Lieberman (ID-CT)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Daniel K. Akaka (D-HI)
Bill Nelson (D-FL)
Ben Nelson (D-NE)
Evan Bayh (D-IN)
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY)
Mark Pryor (D-AR)
James Webb (D-VA)
Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
As you can see, Joe Lieberman is fourth in seniority on the Armed Services committee. But Teddy Kennedy is suffering from brain cancer and will be focused on health care issues and chairing the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) committee. As for Robert Byrd, his age-related health issues led him to give up his chair on the Appropriations Committee. If anything happens to Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman will be in line to take over the chair of Armed Services. And the ranking member of that committee? John McCain.
Can you imagine a situation where Lieberman and McCain preside over Armed Services committee hearings in the Senate? I can’t. That’s why I would prefer the punishment for Lieberman to be full removal from the Armed Services committee (which would obviously cost him his chair of the Airland Subcommittee).
I don’t trust Lieberman to preside over our Homeland Security or to be a good watchdog on government affairs. I’d strip him of all chairs, take away his seniority, and disallow from attending strategy sessions. But if you give me the option of leaving him as chair of Homeland Security or leaving him in position to take over Armed Services, I’d leave him as chair of Homeland Security. Just something to think about.
Agreed. Excellent insight. And since Homeland Security Pork Barrel Department might be obsolete in a few years, since it’s been such an obvious free-for-all to corporations and drain on OUR TAX MONEY, Lieberman may go down with DHS.
I’m trying to look at this backwards and sideways. Here’s what I got:
-Wouldn’t it be a good thing to have a partisan bitch like Lieberman doing his job and investigating what’s going on with things under his purview?
-In that vein, the Obama administration could really tie him into knots by having every testifier and the White House Press Office boom out the statement that while LIeberman was not doing his job during the Bush years (an unanswerable criticism because it’s true) the entire setup has fallen to pieces and the Obama people are working to fix it? I think it would be a serious problem for Lieberman to announce an investigation and come to find out that the Obama people are fixing things that he let break down under his watch.
I have mixed feelings about this.
My blogger friends are obsessed with the idea that Lieberman might use his committee to pursue asshat conspiracy theories dreamed up in the FOX News asshat Dan Burton school of conspiracy asshattery.
It’s always possible that he will do that. But it’s not like I want the chair of that committee to behave like a Republican and blow-off every example of possible malfeasance in the Obama administration.
I want the chair of that committee to do their job of oversight. In other words, I’m not worried or concerned that Lieberman might challenge the Obama administration. But I don’t want him having anything to do with setting policy for the Pentagon.
In other words, I’m not worried or concerned that Lieberman might challenge the Obama administration.
I wouldn’t be worried about legitimate concerns of oversight. I’d be ecstatic if I thought that Lieberman was going to use his committee chair to do legitimate oversight.
But I don’t. The man had the chair for two years during the Bush administration and did nothing. Zilch. Nada. No legitimate oversight function whatsoever. Against one of the most corrupt and incompetent presidential administrations in my lifetime. And now he’s fighting tooth and nail to keep that chair. So given his disinterest in legitimate oversight and his general schtick of being the contrarian Democrat that likes to talk smack about Dems to feel like a big man and get on all the teevee shows, I don’t think he wants the chair for any kind of legitimate oversight interest.
My objections would be the same to the Armed Services chair – he shouldn’t have that either. If he must retain a chair, it should be in an area where he’s setting actual policy and where his views align with the Democratic majority. Otherwise, the Dems in the Senate are just begging for a spanner to be thrown into their works.
Josh Marshall
Well, that certainly thickens the plot.
I still want to make sure Lieberman is made to suffer for his behavior. Obviously, I am not as good or forgiving a person as Obama.
Just thinking. If the Democrats should pick up those hotly contested senate eats in Alaska, Minnesota, and Georgia and Holy Joe stays in the Democrat caucus and votes accordingly, then, isn’t that magical number of sixty achieved? Obama maybe is not so forgiving after all. Just a good vote counter.
The Republicans, realizing all this simple math, respond by sending their big guns to Georgia to make sure that Chambliss wins and the Democrats don’t reach the promised land of “sixty”.
There’s no reason to think a known traitor is any more likely to vote with the Dems as a caucus member than as an indie or a Republican. The Dem caucus hardly ever votes as one, so all these arguments about 60 votes, etc., are meaningless. Majority matters incredibly, and the Dems have that. 60 votes means no more than 59 votes or 57 votes. That’s just another specious smokescreen emitted by the Lovers of Joe.
Boy, Obama really, really does not want anyone responsible in charge of investigating his filthy little war machine. Must have nasty plans in store and is already working to block any possibilities of any congressional oversight. Hate to say that, but there simply isn’t any other reason for him to want Lieberman to stay on as chair.
When the hell did the president start having a say in congressional committee assignments? Can’t ever recall a president openly trying to influence those. I’m really getting a bad feeling about this guy…
I think you have it backwards. If Obama wanted no oversight, he’d have signaled for concrete shoes in Lieberman’s size. By leaving him where he is, Lieberman can do his thing, including execute oversight.
As for “his” filthy war machine, that’s way off the mark. He’s inheriting Bush’s war machine, not making one of his own.
I don’t like what Lieberman has done either but don’t be foolish about what he might provide by being the 60th vote. Use him the way he has used his position.
If Obama had any balls he’d render Lieberman to a Syrian jail and tell them to issue a condition report sometime in 2013. Bastard should be stripped of EVERYTHING, including his party credentials. What does the mob do to someone flouting the rules on the street? See what the hell happens you stick your nose where it doesn’t belong, do business with unapproved people, cast your lost with a family at odds with “your own”. You end up buried under Giants Stadium. In the river. In the trunk of a car on the way to the junkyard crusher. Obama should do whatever the worst there is at his disposal without breaking any laws. Serve notice to everyone else there is a penalty to be paid for such nonsense.
But if you give me the option of leaving him as chair of Homeland Security or leaving him in position to take over Armed Services, I’d leave him as chair of Homeland Security. Just something to think about.
Not me Boo. Surely you’ve seen Benen in the washington monthly:
get him outta there.
The bottom line is, there’s no good place in the senate for rape gurney joe…he should resign and go back to being McCain’s minder on a full-time basis.
oh, there’s a good place for joe alright.
it’s called “the 9th plane of Hell”, although I’d be satisfied with a one way trip to the Pine Barrens.
Isn’t there a chairmanship open for the Antiques Roadshow Security Committee?
And can we all agree to get rid of the hideous “Homeland” moniker for everything in government? It’s like a knockoff of the old Nazi “Fatherland” brand. “Domestic” identifies what we’re talking about without the goosestepping.
Why the kid glove treatment for Lieberman? There has to be more to it than Obama trying to look bipartisan. Either Joe has some dirt on someone or some other hidden source of power we’re not seeing, or there’s a quid pro quo that’s not yet come to light. Are they counting on Joe to bring along a group of Republican friends when health or energy or climate change comes up in the Senate to avoid a filibuster? Could he be trusted to deliver?
Something “doesn’t smell right.” There’s some part of this we’re not seeing. Obama may be a nice guy but he’s also a Chicago politician, and I’d be very surprised (and, to be honest, a bit disappointed at the naivete) if there’s not a bit of the steel fist under the velvet glove.
So tell me what I’m missing.
Why are we assuming that Roll Call is spewing anything more than vapid gossip? Obama said he hopes Lieberman stays in the caucus. He did not say he wants him to stay in charge of the committee. The Beltway hookers are all in line trying to make one thing mean another thing.
Maybe Obama for some sick reason of his own wants a traitor in his midst, but I doubt it. When Roll Call’s apparent sole evidence is twisting Obama’s words plus crap like “fingerprints seemingly everywhere”, I’ll assume that they join the rest of their colleagues in a desperate propaganda effort to save Lieberman’s ass.
Lieberman is not a Democrat either in name or in action. He has no right to any committee chairmanship or other privileges that come with being a member of the majority party.