Joltin' Joe

After watching Joe Lieberman’s appearance on Meet the Press yesterday I think it’s worth revisiting his future within the Democratic Party. For quite some time the party line among senate Democrats was that Lieberman was worth having in the Democratic Party because his only consistent and substantive difference was in regards to the War on Terror. However, it’s becoming increasingly clear that as Lieberman becomes a more active surrogate for the McCain campaign that he’s crossing party lines on more and more issues, illustrated yesterday by his endorsement of increased coastal oil drilling.

One could legitimately expect that he’s not done with his policy metamorphosis, and that as he continues to campaign for McCain (a certainty), and gets a heavyweight position at the Republican national convention (quite likely) his positions will only move further away from those held by the Democratic members of Congress.

Yesterday, John Kerry insisted that he’d always have a place in the Democratic caucus. Most political commentators talk about how, if the Democrats want to attain or approach a 60 filibuster proof majority, they’ll need every member they can get.

What I think is getting lost in the equation is exactly what kind of a member Lieberman will be, particularly if McCain is elected. Surely, in that event his cloture vote could never be counted on to advance a Democratic legislative agenda if it were in any way at odds with the White House (which one would assume would be very often). I cannot possibly imagine how having him in the caucus for a McCain presidency would be an asset.

I think his odds improve with an Obama win, but I’m still not convinced it’s strategically sound to keep him around. His relationship, not with Democratic senators, but with the party in general could not be worse. Obama seems to see him (legitimately) as a turncoat after McCain asked (or pleaded depending on who you believe) Obama to campaign for him during the Conn. Democratic primary (which he subsequently lost of course), and though I think Obama is more strategic and calculating than grudge holding, it’s not inconceivable that he could lean on his party to kick Lieberman out of the caucus, 60 seats be damned. No Democrat anywhere will be headed up to Conn. to get him reelected in 2012. In fact with Conn. being so liberal I’d imagine you’d see very organized opposition to his reelection from party officials. Kicking him out of the caucus might be a way to maximize your chances of seeing someone liberal emerge out of the state in 2012, as I have a hard time believing that he’s got much of a shot at reelection out of Conn. if he’s caucusing with the Republicans.

What do people think? What am I missing? How and why does he stay in the caucus from a pragmatic standpoint?