Before May 24, few people outside Washington,
D.C., or Vermont had even heard of Senator Jim Jeffords. But
Jeffords’ surprise decision to resign from the Republican
Party and assume the status of the lone Independent in the
Senate gave him sudden front-page status. The Jeffords switch
has turned control of the Senate back to the Democrats by
giving them a one-vote majority — and the political
shockwaves are still being felt. It was one of those
out-of-the-blue happenings that takes our minds off the
otherwise bleak political situation for working people here in
Washington, D.C.
I have to admit that watching this whole
spectacle was fun. The big business lobby crowd and their
Republican subordinates didn’t know what hit them. It only
took about three days from the time rumors got loose until
Jeffords held his press conference to leave the Republican
Party. All over our fair city, corporate and Republican
operatives were suffering seizures and conniption fits as they
realized their master plan was coming unglued. And to top if
off, these guys can’t stand the fact that the cause of their
setback came from – of all places – Vermont! For this
bunch, Vermont is just a piddly state up north someplace that’s
full of cows.
FRANTIC
Over at the White House, Bush and Cheney were
frantic. At first they hadn’t taken the Jeffords rumors
seriously. After all, who would dare to do such a thing? By
the time they realized that Jeffords really was on his way
out, it was too late. Jeffords met with Bush and Cheney just
two days before his announcement. Congressional Quarterly reported
later that "Neither meeting went well." And the
Vermont Senator’s phone was already ringing off the hook as
White House and Republican staff lined up personal calls to
Jeffords from senior Republican Congressional leaders, and
even his wealthy campaign contributors. For a few days,
Jeffords was offered just about anything he wanted, but in the
end he turned it all down and made the switch.
At his press conference on May 24, Jeffords
said his decision to leave the Republican Party was based on
his fundamental disagreement with the increasingly extreme
positions of the Republican leadership. He cited education as
the biggest issue, noting that "for some time, success
seems to be measured by the number of students moved out of
the public schools." By this yardstick, Jeffords should
have quit the Republican Party 20 years ago. And
unfortunately, I can think of more than a few contemporary
Democrats who seem to share the Republican outlook on
education.
IS
HE REALLY A LIBERAL?
One of the byproducts of the Jeffords episode
was a tendency by the news media to describe the Vermont
Senator as a "moderate" or a "liberal
Republican." There was even rampant rumor-mongering in
the several days leading up to the switch to the effect that
Jeffords was going to join the Democratic Party. The talk show
circuit was jammed with those paid to speak for the Democrats
encouraging this speculation. Odds were the Democrats would
have welcomed him.
But is Jeffords really a "liberal"?
Jeffords has been in Congress for 26 years,
the last 12 years in the Senate. He has a history of
straddling Democratic and Republican lines on issues. But more
often than not, he’s gone with the Republicans. According to
Congressional Quarterly, out of 74 party-line Senate
cloture votes (to cut off debate), Jeffords voted with
Republicans 59 times. Eight of the 15 times he sided with the
Democrats, he was voting in support of campaign finance
reform.
Jeffords co-sponsored the Clinton health care
plan in 1994. He voted for the job-killing China trade deal in
1997 but against it in 2000. He supported the outrageous
"NAFTA for Africa" bill in 1999 but voted against
the regressive bankruptcy bill in the same year. The Senator
voted against the voucher scheme to attack the public schools
in 2000, but he opposed the weak "Patients Bill of
Rights" last year and again this year.
My union, UE, rated
Jeffords as voting for working people just 23 percent of
the time over the past two years, while the AFL-CIO gave him a
38 percent correct rating for 2000 and a lifetime 39 percent
pro-worker rating.
But Jeffords scores well with big business. In
1998, he was awarded a perfect 100 percent pro-business rating
by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. That same year he scored a 75
percent rating by the anti-union Associated Builders and
Contractors.
So what does it mean to have this pro-business
Republican switch sides?
Some Congressional Democrats, as well as the
paid spokespersons, "strategists," and consultants
for the Democratic National Committee want us to think that a
return to Democratic control of the Senate is the miracle
cure. They would have us believe that we are saved when in
fact we are not.
Some of the Republicans’ very worst
anti-worker initiatives have been slowed, and the Bush-Cheney
locomotive has certainly lost a lot of steam. But we still
face a Congress that is likely to pass a very anti-worker
bankruptcy bill. Any kind of meaningful campaign finance
reform is in serious trouble. An education bill that leaves a
lot to be desired is likely to pass. A phony bipartisan
"Commission" to privatize Social Security is well
underway with little criticism from Democrats. And the
"Fast Track" scheme to rush new and destructive
trade bills through Congress will probably pass the Senate
with votes to spare. And forget the good stuff that should
really be on our agenda — from Just Health Care to workers’
rights. Jeffords and the Senate may now tilt to the Democrats,
but unfortunately, that doesn’t mean as much as it ought to.
The Jeffords affair at least buys us some
time. Time to organize our defenses, time to plan our
counterattack, time to ask someone to join the Labor Party.
Chris Townsend is political action director
of the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of
America (UE).
