Senator Scott Brown is Beholden to No One

Scott Brown.jpg

(Providence, Rhode Island)

I am quite honestly stunned as I read political blogs and stories today. Conservatives are having a field day dissecting the newest U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, Scott Brown. He was one of five Republicans who crossed over in the Senate to vote for a jobs bill sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV).

Republicans are mad. People are calling Brown a “RINO,” the acronym for "Republican in Name Only!" Other articles I have seen call him a “turncoat” and “Benedict Brown!” So the man many loved just five weeks ago, is the man many are despising today. I just don’t get it. “To say I've sold out any particular party or interest group, I think, is certainly unfair," Brown told a Boston radio station.

Some in California’s Tea Party movement are even upset because they donated lots of money to Brown’s campaign in the eleventh hour. (That puzzles me because I thought part of the “tea party” philosophy was to stop big money from causing “predetermined” outcomes in politics. Just a thought!)

To me Brown is a refreshing face in Washington. No one owns him (not yet anyway). He is a populist guy from one of the most liberal states in the nation. Brown won, mostly because independent voters picked him. Yes, he carried Republicans; and, yes, even about 22 percent of Democrats picked him, but where he really cleaned up was among Independents--taking over 70 percent of their votes.

Brown went to Washington as a conservative on fiscal issues and a liberal on social issues, such as abortion. We all knew that, going in. He promised to be the 41st vote to block President Obama’s version of health care reform, and so far he shows no sign of bucking that promise. Today’s vote was on a $15 billon dollar jobs bill that critics say won’t create any jobs and should have had deeper tax cuts. Maybe they are right; maybe not. But New England is having very bad employment problems (Rhode Island’s unemployment rate is 12.9 percent), so Brown probably felt some obligation to vote for the bill, as did two other moderate Republicans, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine.

"You've already turned out to be as big an idiot as Obama," said one Facebook poster, who was quoted by Associated Press. "Enjoy your one term as senator," the writer added. Okay, by that logic, does the seat go back to Democrats in 2012? If nothing else changes, they’ll have a filibuster- proof majority again. “Ditching” Brown because of one vote makes no political or practical sense.

A year ago, I predicted that the far left of the Democratic Party would be the most disappointed in Obama. Surely enough, a year later Guantanamo is still open; the war in Afghanistan has been escalated; and the one thing certain about health care is there will be no public option. Many in Obama’s base are furious and feel betrayed.

Will his base seek another candidate to challenge Obama for renomination? I doubt it. Most liberals would rather have Obama than a centrist, such as Evan Bayh (who, I think, may run). So if the left can be tolerant of Obama's being a pragmatist at times, then why can’t the right do the same for Brown? Scott Brown will likely vote with moderates and conservatives most of the time—just not all of the time.
Governing more from the center, or governing on some issues together, is going to become a more common theme in Congress as the year progresses. Because of the vast and growing number of Independents who claim no party affiliation, I am hearing more voters (and candidates) talk about trying to work together on issues, instead of being so partisan. That sentiment got Scott Brown elected. Let’s see whether he can get anything done. Some days his backers will like him; some days they won’t. But, in judging the Senate's newest member, let’s "not throw the baby out with the bath water!"

Today on her Facebook page, my niece wrote: “It’s not always rainbows and butterflies. It’s compromise that moves us along.” I don’t know her context, and perhaps it had nothing to do with politics. Still, I thought it was a great lesson about what happened with Senator Brown today.

Please post your comments below, and by all means, disagree if you wish!

There is always a difference of sincerity of word before and after the elections. In the test, many a politician buckle and Scott Brown is no exception. It is true that “It’s not always rainbows and butterflies. It’s compromise that moves us along.” It is more so in politics.htc incredible accessories

Yes, very true. I also find it very interesting that people judge candidates so strictly, while tending to forget that it really is a compromise. Scott Brown is only human, and people are mad for that?Rancho Santa Fe Real Estate

'So the man many loved just five weeks ago, is the man many are despising today.' It is all due to a binding substance, as cement in concrete and deeds in words. 'He promised to be the 41st vote to block President Obama’s version of health care reform, and so far he shows no sign of bucking that promise.'mens messenger bags

Perhaps Senator Brown IS beholden to all those people who supported him and raised funds for him. He did, after all, present himself as a fiscal conservative. While his emphasis was on the so-called healthcare reform, that was hardly the only fiscal issue raised during his campaign. Perhaps he can still redeem himself with his critics should the jobs bill prove to be successful, but the record so far on job-creating stimulus spending is pretty underwelming.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options