In Defense of Lincoln Chafee
Looks like Chafee provided the crucial vote on Bush's Orwellian-titled "Clear Skies Act":
I've been a staunch member of the "Vote Chafee Out" faction among Rhode Island Democrats, but I have to say that things like this make it difficult. To play devil's advocate for a moment, putting aside whatever personal respect I have for Lincoln Chafee, there are certain practical arguments in favor of re-electing him. Since legislation is controlled more by the committees than by floor votes unless there is a majority of only one or two, we're arguably better off with Chafee in a narrowly Republican Senate than we would be with a Democrat. If Chafee loses the next election but the Republicans retain control, his seat on the EPW Committee won't go to his Democratic replacement but to a different Republican. Which means that unless that Republican is somebody like John McCain or Susan Collins, we'll probably be screwed on these sorts of votes. (And even then we might be, in that Chafee is still more pro-environment than any other Senate Republican.)
In other words, it's a nasty Catch-22. If we can't have a Democratic Senate, we might be better off with Chafee. But if we don't beat Chafee, it's going to be even harder to have a Democratic Senate.
President Bush's bid to rewrite the nation's air pollution laws ground to a halt in Congress Wednesday when Republicans were unable to overcome objections in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that the bill would weaken central pillars of environmental protection.
[...]
Democrats, joined by Sen. James Jeffords, I-Vt., and Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., said that negotiations had been conducted in bad faith, that the initiative's pollution control targets were set too low, and that certain loopholes in the bill were irresponsible.
I've been a staunch member of the "Vote Chafee Out" faction among Rhode Island Democrats, but I have to say that things like this make it difficult. To play devil's advocate for a moment, putting aside whatever personal respect I have for Lincoln Chafee, there are certain practical arguments in favor of re-electing him. Since legislation is controlled more by the committees than by floor votes unless there is a majority of only one or two, we're arguably better off with Chafee in a narrowly Republican Senate than we would be with a Democrat. If Chafee loses the next election but the Republicans retain control, his seat on the EPW Committee won't go to his Democratic replacement but to a different Republican. Which means that unless that Republican is somebody like John McCain or Susan Collins, we'll probably be screwed on these sorts of votes. (And even then we might be, in that Chafee is still more pro-environment than any other Senate Republican.)
In other words, it's a nasty Catch-22. If we can't have a Democratic Senate, we might be better off with Chafee. But if we don't beat Chafee, it's going to be even harder to have a Democratic Senate.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home