There's been a lot of talk on the left lately about the machinations of Joe Lieberman in his primary campaign against Ned Lamont. As a three-term incumbent, Joe has a lot of favors to call in -- and he seems to be calling in all of them. The one thing that cannot be tolerated, though, is interference from the DSCC and its chair, Chuck Schumer, in the selection process of the Democratic candidate by the Democratic voters in a primary.
I sent the following out to several newspapers in NY, NJ and CT, and encourage you to also voice your objections to Democratic kingmakers taking the right to choose a representative away from Democratic voters.
In Connecticut, Senator Joseph Lieberman is facing a surprisingly tough primary opponent in Ned Lamont. Echoing the frustration of Democratic activists across the nation, Lamont decries Lieberman's frequent undercutting of fellow Democrats on myriad issues and calls for progressive responses to the country's problems. Such a choice between two political views for the state's Democratic voters is a good thing, right?
Apparently not to Senator Chuck Schumer, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. The DSCC, a national party organization missioned to win Senate seats, picks and chooses which candidates they will support with financial contributions and staffing. A wise goal for Democrats, to be sure, but the DSCC frequently takes sides in primary battles where all opponents are seeking to gain the support of local party voters to represent them in the general election. Last year, it was widely reported that Schumer urged Paul Hackett to drop out of the primary race against Sherrod Brown, and this year the DSCC endorsed John Morrison over Jon Tester in Montana (Tester won the primary and will run against Conrad Burns in November).
On Sunday, June 25, Time magazine reported that, according to Ned Lamont, Schumer asked him to drop his bid to run for the Senate seat currently occupied by Lieberman. Schumer has also said that he does not rule out the possibility of supporting Lieberman in an independent bid for the Senate should Lieberman bolt the party, which runs directly counter to the DSCC's mission.
Some argue that such tactics are politically smart; that by avoiding primaries, candidates are "undamaged" by campaigns and resources are conserved for general elections. However, they are also fundamentally undemocratic, since they take the decision of choosing a candidate away from those who are supposedly being represented and put it in the hands of a select few "kingmakers".
Senator Schumer needs to be reminded that "Of the people, by the people, for the people" isn't just a pretty slogan. While he isn't up for re-election until 2010, it's not inconceivable that he should also have to convince Democratic voters why he's the best choice to represent New Yorkers in the US Senate at that time, the way his friend Joe Lieberman has to convince Connecticut Democrats now.