Team Clinton

Massachusetts's congressional Democrats emerge as the philanderer-in-chief's most reliable defenders

Don't Quote Me by Dan Kennedy

Two types of politicians stalk the corridors on Capitol Hill these days: Republicans, gleefully stretching Ken Starr's thin but humiliating impeachment gruel as far as they can; and Democrats, wanly supporting the president in public, but in private looking nervously at the election calendar and just wishing the reprobate-in-chief would slither away.

Then there is the Massachusetts delegation -- 12 liberal Democrats from the state that gave Bill Clinton his widest margin of victory in 1996. The state where Representative Jim McGovern, a Worcester freshman who's facing a credible Republican opponent in November, greeted Clinton just days after his atrocious August 17 apology speech with a rousing -- and very public -- message of friendship. Where Senator Ted Kennedy, not long after the release of Starr's damaging report, boisterously proclaimed at a Boston fundraiser, "This was Clinton country in '92, it was Clinton country in 1996, it is Clinton country tonight!"

It's been nearly a generation since 1972, when Massachusetts earned a reputation for being the Great Liberal Exception by supporting Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern over Richard Nixon. Now, even after eight years of having tax-averse Republican governors on Beacon Hill, it doesn't seem that much has changed. At the hour of Clinton's greatest peril, with the House Judiciary Committee voting on Monday to open a full impeachment inquiry, the president has only two groups of legislators he can reliably count on: the Congressional Black Caucus and the Massachusetts congressional delegation.

"Massachusetts is Clinton's base," says CNN political analyst William Schneider. "It's that delegation that's trying to act as brokers on his behalf. They can present themselves as Clinton's core supporters and try to influence the process on his behalf." By contrast, consider the delegation from Clinton's home state of Arkansas -- three Democrats and three Republicans, nearly all of them wary of the Christian right. "The Arkansas delegation is basically all on the fence," says Gene Lyons, a columnist for the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette and a Clinton defender. "This state is full of Shiite Baptists."

In the poisonous atmosphere of Washington, it's interesting that observers such as Schneider label Massachusetts's legislators as being pro-Clinton. In fact, the two most visible have been Senator John Kerry, who's pushing a widely praised initiative for a compromise settlement, and Representative Barney Frank, of Newton, Clinton's chief defender on the Judiciary Committee. Both men have made it clear that they are appalled by Clinton's behavior and that he deserves some form of punishment. The state's other two Judiciary Committee members, Representatives Marty Meehan, of Lowell, and Bill Delahunt, of Quincy, have, if anything, been even less willing to cut Clinton any slack. (Nevertheless, Meehan's publicly expressed doubts as to whether Clinton deserves to be impeached for perjuring himself over blowjobs have been enough to earn him the nickname "Maxine" -- as in Representative Maxine Waters, head of the Congressional Black Caucus -- from Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr.)

The difference, then, isn't that Massachusetts Democrats condone immoral and illegal behavior, but rather that they understand the distinction between lying about personal failings and committing the "high crimes and misdemeanors" specified by the Constitution as grounds for impeachment. If Massachusetts's senators and representatives can keep their colleagues focused on that distinction, they may yet salvage Clinton's presidency. Here's how the state's delegation shapes up.

Leading men. Clinton's point people on the Hill thus far have been John Kerry and Barney Frank. Kerry's call for an expedited inquiry in return for Clinton's full cooperation may serve to further Kerry's own political ambitions -- not only because such a deal would enhance his national stature, but also because Al Gore's presidential campaign would presumably be damaged by having a wounded but still-standing Clinton hovering over him. Frank's role as Clinton's lawyer on the Judiciary Committee may ultimately contribute to a more cosmically significant development: reviving the congressman's once-famed but flagging sense of humor.

Indeed, though Frank's defense of Clinton is both substantive and serious, his witty sound bites are what have brought him the most attention. "Newt Gingrich issuing rules of decorum is like Mike Tyson reissuing the Marquis of Queensbury rules," he said at one news conference. "If this was bipartisanship," he said on another occasion, "the Taliban wins a medal for religious tolerance." And a New Yorker piece that described Frank as setting his shirt on fire while attempting to light a cigar brought this letter to the editor from Frank: "The implication that I was unsuccessful in lighting my cigar while lighting my shirt is inaccurate. In fact, I not only succeeded in lighting both but was further able to quickly extinguish the latter while keeping the former burning." This is vintage Frank, reminiscent of the 1970s, when he kept his colleagues in the Massachusetts legislature in stitches. "Barney Frank clearly spends time thinking about what he's going to say," says Tucker Carlson, who writes for the pro-impeachment Weekly Standard. "He's glib. That's a shallow criterion, but journalism is a shallow business."

Behind the quips, though, is a take-no-prisoners position: not only that Clinton's behavior is not impeachable, but that it was brought to light by means of serious misconduct by Ken Starr. "They got the goods on Clinton and Lewinsky illegally," Frank told the Phoenix, referring to Linda Tripp's undercover tapes. He further describes the "broad powers of discovery" that Starr used to detail Clinton and Lewinsky's sexual affair as a "very dangerous tool that would dissolve everybody's privacy." What Clinton deserves, he adds, is "the constitutional equivalent of a good kick in the ass."

From a public-relations point of view, Frank may not be the best person to serve as the Democrats' point man: he survived a sex scandal of his own about a decade ago. "That was a youthful indiscretion on my part," Frank quips, slyly referring to a comment made by Judiciary chairman Henry Hyde (R-Illinois) after Salon magazine revealed that Hyde had an affair when he was in his 40s. But Frank, Congress's only openly gay member, sees it as a sign of increased public sophistication that his personal life has not been an issue. Besides, what Clinton needs on the Judiciary Committee isn't a moral defender but a lawyer -- and that's a role in which Frank excels.

If Frank's function is that of the lawyer, Kerry aims to be the conciliator. It hasn't been easy: his proposal has been widely misinterpreted as both a plea bargain under which Clinton would accept a congressional censure (in fact, Kerry says he still sees impeachment as an option, though an unlikely one) and a feeler put out by the White House (Kerry says it's not, but it probably hasn't helped that his idea is being promoted by Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant, a notorious Clinton sycophant).

Kerry, though, thinks the time for his proposal simply hasn't come yet. If the Republicans fail to win the massive gains they're counting on in November, he believes they'll come looking for a way to get the Clinton matter over with as quickly as possible. "I personally believe the time will come when people will be looking for that way or some way like it. Regrettably, the Republicans are intent on politicizing this," Kerry told the Phoenix.

Among pundits, there is near-unanimity that Kerry's nascent presidential campaign would get an enormous boost if he could broker a resolution to the crisis. "Those who take the high road in this swamp of madness are going to be remembered. I don't see how John can lose," says Cambridge-based political consultant Janis Pryor, who helped shore up Kerry's support in the African-American community during his difficult 1996 reelection campaign. Responds Kerry: "I'm going to leave all of the political speculating up to other people. It's kind of silly to spend much time worrying about that."

Supporting actors. Judiciary Committee members Marty Meehan and Bill Delahunt, both former state prosecutors, have taken a back seat to their senior colleague Barney Frank, but neither has been shy about grabbing the spotlight now and then. Meehan has been outspoken in both his revulsion toward Clinton's behavior and his skepticism as to whether he should be removed from office, which has served to establish him as an important -- and articulate -- swing vote. Time magazine recently labeled him as one of two Democrats who "could have real influence if they begin to drift into the anti-Clinton camp."

Delahunt, meanwhile, has emerged as one of four committee members (two Democrats, two Republicans) who've taken the lead in crafting a credible, bipartisan approach to the impeachment probe. In a front-page piece in the New York Times, Delahunt was glowingly described as "a skilled interrogator" who "had won praise from Republicans for his thorough and even-handed approach on thorny committee issues from music copyrights to Medicare fraud."

Off-camera. Aside from brief cameos by Ted Kennedy, Jim McGovern, and Representative Joe Moakley, of Boston, the remainder of the state's delegation has been notably quiet, though all are considered certain pro-Clinton votes should things come down to that.

Take the case of Representative John Tierney, of Salem, who's trying to fend off a tough reelection challenge from former Republican congressman Peter Torkildsen. Tierney let a reporter from National Public Radio follow him around on a few campaign stops recently -- but he refused to talk about the Clinton scandal, preferring to let constituents simply express their views.

If Tierney is waiting for the will of the people to clarify, then Clinton probably has little to worry about. Even as the House moved toward impeachment this week, the sense in Washington, and nationally, was that the public wanted the inquiry wrapped up quickly, and with a punishment for Clinton that would fall well short of removal from office.

Indeed, Barney Frank, whose sister is Clinton flack Ann Lewis (he says they talk more about family than politics), says the White House has already concluded that Clinton won't be impeached. "They figured it out early, and we had to restrain them," he says. The challenge at this point, Frank adds, is simply to hang on until after the election, after which House Republicans -- including Newt Gingrich, who wants to run for president -- will presumably have to figure out a way to shut down the inquiry without enraging hard-core anti-Clintonites.

That's when Gingrich, Hyde, and company will be looking to cut a deal. Their best bet for a negotiating partner: the all-Democratic Massachusetts delegation, scorned when it comes time to dole out pork, sneered at by University of Virginia government professor Larry Sabato as "the Bill Clinton defense team," wielding a bare shadow of the influence it had when Democrats were in the majority and Tip O'Neill was Speaker. But holding more cards than anyone might have supposed.

---

Dan Kennedy's work can be accessed from his Web site: http://www.shore.net/~dkennedy

---

Dan Kennedy can be reached at dkennedy[a]phx.com

---

Articles from July 24, 1997 & before can be accessed here

---