The Courage of Their Convictions

The switch of one vote from Democrat to Republican, even temporarily, would improve the GOP’s prospects for achieving its most cherished goal, tax reform. In the narrowly divided Senate, a single vote defeated the repeal and replacement of Obamacare, and a single vote could clear the way not only for the tax bill but also for confirmation of Trump administration officials and judicial nominees.

This assumes Menendez would leave the Senate if convicted. But should he win acquittal, Republicans would gain nothing. And even if he’s convicted, it won’t revive the failed efforts to kill Obamacare. That must await a new budget in 2018 with special “reconciliation” rules that authorize passage by a simple majority vote, according to Senate officials.

If the jury finds Menendez guilty, he would be under extreme pressure to resign immediately. New Jersey voters favor that. In a Fox News poll in mid-October, 73 percent said he should step down if found guilty of “corruption charges.” In late September, a Suffolk University poll found that 84 percent—including 77 percent of registered Democrats—think he should resign if convicted of bribery.

Senate Republicans are prepared to demand he quit instantly. In that case, Republican governor Chris Christie would appoint a Republican to the seat. Democrats might prefer to keep Menendez in office until January 17, when a newly elected governor, probably a Democrat, takes over. But the new governor couldn’t substitute his pick for Christie’s. He could only schedule a special election for the Senate seat in a few months. So all in all, there would be an additional Republican senator for four or five months. Or longer if a Republican won the special election.

In the meantime, Senate Democrats have no good options for dealing with a Menendez conviction. Should they stand aside while he remains in office, they’ll be accused of poisoning the Senate or at least of hypocrisy.

When a jury convicted Republican senator Ted Stevens of Alaska on corruption charges in 2008, then-majority leader Harry Reid, a Democrat. said: “The reality is that a convicted felon is not going to be able to serve in the United States Senate.” If Stevens balks at resigning, he “will face an ethics committee investigation and expulsion.” Barack Obama, still a senator, said Stevens “should step down.” Stevens did, though his conviction was later vacated.

Mitch McConnell, then Senate minority leader, insisted Stevens would be expelled if he didn’t leave on his own. “There is a 100 percent certainty that he would be expelled. .  .  . The Senate would have zero tolerance for the continued service of a convicted felon,” McConnell said.

An aide says McConnell is “righteous” on matters of wrongdoing by senators. He was instrumental in easing Republican senators Bob Packwood of Oregon and John Ensign of Nevada out of the Senate when they were morally compromised. He did the same with Larry Craig of Idaho.

With Menendez, Republicans have many options. The most difficult would be quick expulsion by the Senate in the event Menendez is convicted but refuses to resign. That requires a two-thirds vote—all 52 GOP senators plus 15 Democrats.

The hard part would be getting a handful of Democrats, much less 15. But the Republican National Committee is geared up to target the 10 Democratic senators from states won by President Trump. And special attention would be paid to Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer. Since a vote against expulsion wouldn’t sit well with voters, Republicans are ready to make the most of that issue.

A second option involves taking the Menendez matter to the Senate ethics committee. With the committee’s stamp of approval, a majority vote would suffice to toss Menendez out of the Senate. But the committee is bipartisan, with three Republicans and three Democrats. This probably means a tie vote and no action by the panel. But it’s not clear McConnell would go the ethics route anyway.

Still another option is a resolution saying felons don’t belong in the Senate. This would have minimal impact, “but it would put Democrats on the record,” a Senate aide says.

As you might expect, Democratic senators aren’t talkative when reporters ask about Menendez. Kamala Harris of California was asked if a convicted felon should stay in the Senate. She wouldn’t say. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts was asked if she had a plan in case Democrats lose a vote—Menendez’s—in the Senate. “I didn’t know about this,” she replied.

When a reporter queried Schumer about standing by Menendez if he’s convicted, the senator’s answer wasn’t responsive. He said this: “Senator Menendez is issuing a spirited defense. We all believe in the presumption of innocence in this country. And Senator Menendez is fighting very hard and we respect that greatly. Next question.” Schumer, by the way, was cagey back in 2008 when asked if Stevens should resign. He said he wasn’t commenting on that situation. “I would say that the fact John McCain and Sarah Palin and Mitch McConnell say he should step down is something Alaska voters will pay attention to.” CBS News said he didn’t want to pile on and cause a backlash that might Stevens get reelected.

Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate minority whip, said Menendez “has given us assurance that there is no substance to these charges.” Federal judge William H. Walls doesn’t appear to agree. He has turned down a motion to dismiss the case and another to declare a mistrial.

Menendez, 63, is accused in an 18-count indictment of taking bribes to use his Senate office to benefit the business of Dr. Salomon Melgen, a close friend. Prosecutors alleged the bribes consisted of gifts and campaign contributions.

Even based on the indictment and before the nine-week trial began, the New York Times and the New Jersey Star-Ledger urged Menendez to step down. That would spare everyone the drama of a trial, the Star-Ledger said. Whatever drama the trial created, it attracted minimal coverage by the national media.

Fred Barnes is an executive editor at THE WEEKLY STANDARD