Tuesday, December 22, 1998

Fallout of vote by Stenholm hard to predict

No wonder U.S. Rep. Charles Stenholm was the last member of the House from Texas to decide whether he would vote to impeach President Bill Clinton. With the input from District 17 split about 50-50, Stenholm was left stranded without a clear mandate from his divided constituents and was forced to rely on his conscience as his only guide. It must have been a lonely, painful choice.

Because whichever way he went, Stenholm was sure to anger voters at home and many of the House members he must work with in what has become a rancorous partisan atmosphere. The pressure from his fellow Democrats and from the White House to support the president must have been strong. And for a man who has built up 20 years’ seniority in the House as a Democrat to go against his party on such a major issue was surely gut wrenching.

Now, Stenholm must live with the consequences of his conscience.

At home, there’s no guarantee Republicans who voted against him in November will change their minds and back him in the future. Democrats who opposed impeachment may be so angered they will not stand behind him again. For Stenholm in 2000, Saturday’s impeachment could be a lose-lose situation.

Within his party

Whether the Democratic leadership in the House will come down hard on Stenholm — as Republicans were apparently threatened if they broke ranks — for being one of only five Democrats to vote with the Republican majority to impeach the president remains to be seen. Given the partisan displays immediately following the impeachment, it would seem likely. Stenholm was noticeably absent when Democrats journeyed to the White House Saturday afternoon to rally with the president. In the past, however, Stenholm has maintained good working relationships with other Democrats even when he disagreed with them, and it is possible many of them respect and understand his position. More should be clear when the new Congress convenes in January.

On the other side of the aisle, House Republicans, with whom Stenholm has already demonstrated he can work, might look even more favorably on him. Although some people will suggest he now switch parties, don’t look for that to happen. As Saturday’s stunning announcement that Rep. Bob Livingston was “resigning” before he had officially become Speaker of the House illustrates, the political landscape in Washington today is too volatile to anticipate, too dangerous to calculate. Besides, Stenholm has shown as much distaste toward the partisan tone and tactics of GOP leaders as he has toward those of his own party.

An honest man who wants to work on the people’s problems — Social Security, Medicare, health care, agriculture, the tax code — Stenholm seems out of place amid the partisan frenzies that grip Washington these days, trapped between two warring factions that give no quarter. His plight — his alienation — is a sad commentary on the ever-increasing rule of partisanship over common sense at the Capitol. If Mr. Smith went to Washington now, the old script wouldn’t hold up.