7.03.00
The Case for Bill Cohen

6.30.00
Another Gore Scandal

6.29.00
Bush's Disappointment

6.27.00
FRC Tightens Its Belt

6.26.00
Debate Prep

6.23.00
Bye-Bye Bayh II

6.22.00
Sympathy for the Devil

6.21.00
The Kids Are Alright

6.20.00
Roe-ing through the Rapids

6.19.00
Stock Options

6.16.00
Sundquist's Folly

6.15.00
Code Blue

6.15.00
The Right Candidate

7/03/00 1:15 p.m.
The Case for Bill Cohen
By picking the secretary of defense as his veep, Gore could signal he's above party considerations.

By Ramesh Ponnuru, NR senior editor

n August 1996, Bob Dole had been so far behind Bill Clinton for so long that he had to pick one of only three people as his vice-president: Bill Bennett, Jack Kemp, and Colin Powell. No other candidate had the same political-celebrity oomph; nobody else would deliver the requisite excitement.

It looks quite likely that Al Gore will be in the same position that Dole was by the time of the Democratic convention in Los Angeles. If George W. Bush will have risen a few points in the polls during the Republican convention, as is widely expected, Gore could be down by double digits. And so Gore will need to do something bold to shake up the race. What better way to change his image as a partisan attack dog than to choose a Republican as his running mate?

Enter Bill Cohen, the secretary of defense and former senator from Maine. Cohen is the only Republican in Clinton's Cabinet. By picking him, Gore could signal that he, like Cohen, is above mere considerations of party. Cohen, for his part, ended his future in the Republican party by taking a job with the hated president; he should be happy to take the offer.

One might argue that a healthy party would not need to reach outside its ranks to find a vice presidential candidate. But the Democrats are not a healthy party. Under Clinton, they have lost scores of senators, congressmen, and governors. That's why the Democratic vice-presidential talk has centered on freshman senators such as Evan Bayh and Dick Durbin — neither of whom would excite anyone in Los Angeles or elsewhere.

The Case Against Jim Traficant
Over the weekend, House majority leader Dick Armey suggested that Jim Traficant, the Ohio congressman, should stay in the Democratic party. The media, he said, cuts Traficant slack that it would not were he to change parties. That's true: Traficant would quickly make the transition from "colorful" Democrat to "maniacal" Republican. But there's a more substantial reason Republicans should spurn Traficant, one that Armey may have been too diplomatic to mention: He's a crook.

In the latest issue of the New Republic, David Grann has an excellent article detailing the congressman's mob ties. In 1982, Traficant, then the sheriff of Youngstown, was tried for taking bribes from the mob. The FBI had him appearing to do so on tape; they also had a signed confession from Traficant. But Traficant conducted a brilliant defense. He claimed that he had been working undercover to subvert the mob, independent of the compromised law-enforcement agencies. The confession and the tapes, he maintained, were doctored. He became a local hero. As Grann writes, "It didn't matter. . . . that the money he had allegedly taken as evidence for the sting was never turned over. Or that one of his deputies claimed on the stand that Traficant had repeatedly asked the deputy to shoot him to make it look like an attempted mob hit." Or that on the tapes, Traficant had essentially previewed this audacious defense for the mobsters. And it didn't matter that when he went to Congress, Traficant hired as his top district aide Charles O'Nesti, whom he had claimed in the trial was one of the targets of his "sting."

But it looks as though Traficant's luck is running out. Several associates, including O'Nesti, have already been convicted as part of an FBI operation against the mob in the area. Traficant is under investigation himself, and an indictment appears to be forthcoming.

Yet Republicans have by and large been welcoming Traficant's hints that he would switch parties if Democrats don't stand by him. Grann quotes Republican congressman Steve LaTourette's words to the Cleveland Plain Dealer: "There isn't a finer man, there isn't a finer member of Congress, there isn't a finer human being. . . than Jim Traficant. God bless you, Jimmy Traficant, and I hope to serve with you for many years." (Not, presumably, in prison.) The NRCC has been exulting over Traficant's promise last week to vote for Denny Hastert for speaker in the next Congress — which could make the difference if Republicans lose a few seats this November.

Republicans — Armey aside — are being morally and politically short-sighted by embracing Traficant at the very moment he's about to receive his just deserts. He's chosen his "family," and Republicans ought not welcome him into theirs.

Columns / Current Issue / Goldberg File / Nota Bene
Washington Bulletin / Subscribe / Ad Info / Home