WHERE ARE THE DEMOCRATS? Only a few weeks ago, they were indignant that anyone would think they took a permissive attitude toward President Clinton’s wrongdoing. While opposed to impeachment and conviction in the Monica Lewinsky case, congressional Democrats insisted President Clinton should not go unpunished. “Most of us do not want to have the public believe that an acquittal means acceptance of the behavior,” said Democratic Senator Carl Levin of Michigan. So they favored strong censure of the president, and, Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein of California said, no one should doubt their motive. They weren’t just looking for political cover.
Now, weeks later, Juanita Broaddrick has accused Clinton of raping her in 1978. Now, there’s no threat of impeachment and no criminal investigation. Now, Democrats are seeking no punishment at all. They’re suddenly restrained and quiet.
No Democrat has demanded that the truth be determined in the case. No Democrat has called for Congress or law enforcement officials to get to the bottom of the case, lest the public think the charge is being winked at. No Democrat has expressed outrage that Clinton might actually be guilty of sexual assault. Only one congressional Democrat, Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, has even said the president should respond directly to Broaddrick’s accusation. One more thing — Clinton’s attorney has called the charge “absolutely false.” But no Democrat has stepped forward in public and said he or she believes this denial.
Democrats have tons of excuses for taking a pass on the Broaddrick case. The timing of her charge couldn’t be worse. Congress is exhausted from dealing with sexual allegations after months of impeachment, and there’s no process for dealing with the new charge.
Besides, members of Congress are busy with other things. Or they simply haven’t been asked about Broaddrick by reporters in Washington or back home. Also, the public doesn’t seem to care about the new allegation. Phone calls and letters are not pouring in. And so on.
No Democrat has put out a press release commenting on Broaddrick, but a few have been forced to respond when questioned by reporters. That response has come in two forms. Either they say the charge is very serious but it’s a matter for legal authorities, not Congress, or they claim the American people want Congress to “move on” to more important business. That’s it. The only other Democratic response is silence. Among the silent Democrats are senators Daniel Patrick Moynihan of New York and Robert Byrd of West Virginia.
Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut is one who regards the charge against Clinton as “obviously very, very serious, more serious than the other allegations that have been made against the president, because this is an allegation of sexual assault.” But he told Wolf Blitzer on CNN Late Edition that since the statute of limitations has run, “I’m afraid this will stay like a cloud overhead for a while.” To be fair, he added, “I think we can’t rush to judgment here.” Wellstone didn’t. He said on Fox News Sunday that the rape charge, “if true . . . would be very serious. How could anybody discount this? And I think the president should speak to it. . . . We shouldn’t say it’s unimportant, but we shouldn’t jump to conclusions. Listen, I think people are sick of that.”
Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have taken the “move on” tack. House minority leader Richard Gephardt told reporters, “I really think the American people are ready to move on. That in no way excuses anything the president did.” The legal system can handle “future charges,” he said, “but we need in the Congress to get back to the people’s business.”
Deputy caucus chairman Martin Frost of Texas said on the Fox News Channel that while he doesn’t know “the alleged facts of this case,” he does know “the country wants us to get on with the business at hand, get on with the problems the country faces.” Senate minority leader Tom Daschle put it this way on This Week on ABC: “There’s not much more that we can learn from a story that’s over 20 years old. I think that what we’d have to do now is move on and do the thing that the American people expect us to do.”
Democrats have a defense for their muted response in the Broaddrick case: Republicans haven’t spoken out much either. True, more Republicans have urged Clinton to answer the charge himself. But then there’s John Kasich of Ohio, the Budget Committee chairman and a candidate for the GOP presidential nomination in 2000. “I’ve really paid little attention” to Broaddrick, he said on This Week. Republicans “have to concentrate on putting their positive agenda out there.” House majority leader Dick Armey declined to deal with the Broaddrick case, too. Should Clinton respond? “I don’t know,” Armey told reporters. “Don’t ask me. I’m not a lawyer.”
Does he believe Broaddrick? “Do I have to answer this kind of thing?” he asked back. Apparently not.
Fred Barnes is executive editor of THE WEEKLY STANDARD.
