The Mod Squad

With Congress split down the middle, New England's block of moderate senators will be more influential than ever

by Seth Gitell

After Arizona Senator John McCain trounced Texas governor George W. Bush in the New Hampshire and Massachusetts primaries, all the national pundits dismissed New England as a political anomaly. They were right -- just look at the region's odd mix of liberal Democratic and moderate Republican senators, with a socialist congressman and independent governor thrown in. But with the Senate deadlocked and the presidential popular vote split 48-48, New England-style politics could come back in vogue for the nation as a whole.

However the current battle over Florida is resolved, one fact will remain unaltered: the new president will face the most evenly divided Senate in recent history. If George W. Bush becomes president and Democrat Maria Cantwell prevails in Washington state, the Senate will be split 50-50. If Al Gore becomes president, a Republican replaces Joseph Lieberman in his Connecticut Senate seat, and Cantwell loses, Republicans will hold only a 52-48 margin in the Senate. In either case, the members of New England's Senate delegation will gain more clout.

New England's senatorial muscle will become stronger in two ways. First, the block of moderate New England Republicans -- Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe of Maine, and Jim Jeffords of Vermont -- will hold the balance of the Senate, meaning that both sides will try to woo their votes. Second, Massachusetts's seasoned senators -- John Kerry and Ted Kennedy -- will be able to use their seniority and their skills to push their respective agendas forward and reap goodies for the region.

But much more than Senate inside baseball is at stake. The New England senators will be at the crux of legislation involving education, health-care reform, and Social Security. And the new president will have to be especially mindful that moderate Republicans probably will not approve judicial appointments they see as too extreme on the right or the left.

"Four of the most important people in the Senate are going to be Snowe, Collins, Jeffords, and Chafee," says Peter Meade, a Boston-based political analyst. "If you're a Republican putting something together, you want to make sure you keep them on the reservation. If you're a Democrat trying to do something, you want to make sure you get them."

With the death last year of Chafee's father John, who had served in the Senate for 23 years, pundits on the right and left proclaimed the end of liberal Rockefeller Republicanism. But this year's closely divided Senate means that what was once thought to be a dinosaur of American politics may be more important than ever. For example, Snowe, Collins, Jeffords, and Chafee are all pro-choice. GOP activists may have been eager to purge such apostasy from their ranks, but the new Senate dynamics mean that they can't. And the members know it.

"It's going to produce more bipartisanship," says Collins. "Moderates such as myself will have an even greater role because we will hold the balance of power on so many issues. It's going to be the only way to get things done."

One bipartisan gesture has already taken place: Snowe telephoned newly elected Michigan senator Deborah Stabenow, a Democrat, to welcome her to the Senate. Snowe had supported the Republican incumbent, Spencer Abraham. "I think everybody is going to recognize right away the old Republican Party doesn't have the votes," says Chafee.

IN THE past session, Republicans held an eight-seat advantage, but political gridlock was the dominant dynamic. And even in these partisan times, there was some precedent for cooperation. Last spring, a group of moderate Republican and Democratic senators met in the back halls of the Capitol and tried to reach agreement on a new education bill. Among others, Democratic senators Lieberman, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, John Edwards of North Carolina, and Bob Graham of Florida huddled with Republican senators, including Collins, Jeffords, and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire. Both sides agreed on more funding for low-income students, but could not agree on the formula to distribute these funds. The effort ultimately failed, but the new Senate may be able to build on bipartisan impulses like the ones this group displayed.

The education discussions, in particular, bode well for the new session. "We kept it quiet because there's a greater chance of success for these things if they're not in the paper every day," says Collins, optimistic about the experience. "It really could be the start of something." The bottom line is that hope of passing anything on the domestic agenda hinges on moderate Republicans' making common cause with the Democrats. Topping the agenda are the changes that polls taken during the primary season and the general election showed the public clamoring for: adding prescription-drug benefits to Medicare and making improvements in education and Social Security.

This analysis assumes that the heated battle for Florida's 25 electoral votes doesn't spoil the environment in the Senate before the next session even starts. "I'm very concerned that it's going to leave a bad taste in people's mouths," Collins says. "I really hope it won't. I really want there to be a fresh start here in Washington."

It won't take much for partisan bitterness to break out. Chafee, who voted with the Democrats more than any other Republican last year, according to Congressional Quarterly, points out that it takes 60 senators to stop an irate senator from launching a filibuster. Given that neither party is likely to muster such a block, Chafee notes that a conservative senator could filibuster to block progress in the Senate. A liberal senator could do the same.

Even so, the New England moderates could have a major influence on Supreme Court nominations. Either Bush or Gore will have to tailor his picks to meet the desires of this moderate faction. That means (sorry, conservatives) no Antonin Scalias or Clarence Thomases. And if Gore becomes president, no Larry Tribes or Alan Dershowitzes, either. Expect more nominations along the lines of Justices David Souter and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. "If you take Jeffords, Chafee, Snowe, and Collins out of the Republican majority and flip them to the Democrats, you reverse the majority," says E.J. Dionne, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "There's less party discipline imposed on people with Supreme Court nominations."

One other nomination will be affected by the next congressional session's narrow divide: should Gore become president, look for a member of the Mod Squad to be appointed to his cabinet. Clinton made this type of bipartisan gesture when he named moderate Republican senator William Cohen of Maine as his secretary of defense. A Gore administration would want a similar veneer of bipartisanship, notes Marshall Wittmann of the Hudson Institute.

MEANWHILE, BOTH Massachusetts senators will move to the forefront. Although Kerry and Kennedy are loyal Democrats, both have a reputation for being able to work across party lines. Kerry, a 16-year Senate veteran, was an early supporter of the Gramm-Rudman deficit-reduction initiatives. He is also known for his personal friendship with Senator John McCain of Arizona -- something that can't hurt given McCain's popularity these days. Kerry knows that the tight numbers in the Senate mean Democrats can get some Republicans to work with them on certain issues. "It's a lot harder for them to keep their numbers together," says Kerry.

The narrowly divided new Senate is likely to play especially well to Kennedy's mastery of arcane Senate procedures and institutional history. Kennedy has made a specialty of getting legislation passed under Republican presidents as part of the Senate minority -- from unemployment legislation, which he co-sponsored with Dan Quayle in the 1980s, to the 1991 Civil Rights Act, which was co-sponsored by Republican senator John Danforth of Missouri and signed by President Bush. And although he is an advocate of liberal causes, Kennedy actually has a history of reaching across the aisle to work with figures such as Senators Orrin Hatch of Utah and Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas.

"Ted Kennedy loves situations when it's so evenly divided so he can make deals," says Wittmann of the Hudson Institute. "This is where Ted Kennedy thrives. He knows how to lure ideological opposites to make legislation."

Kennedy's office says the senator is planning to do just that. "That's been one of the hallmarks of his career," says Kennedy press secretary Jim Manley. "I think that given the current partisan deadlock, those skills are going to be even more important than ever on Capitol Hill, no matter who is president."

Kennedy's strength in the Senate lies in the personal relationships he's developed with other senators -- even as partisanship has come to dominate the institution. Kennedy creates goals for each legislative session, and his name allows him to attract and keep a highly effective staff; in turn, he is able to exploit this advantage when it comes to Senate deal-making. When he began working on the Kennedy-Kassebaum health-insurance bill, for instance, opponents dismissed it out of hand. But it eventually passed with 99 other co-sponsors. Kennedy also strategizes about which particular Republicans would be willing to work with him on a given piece of legislation. "He's going to look at who's up for election in two years and who wants a moderate Republican record, not a conservative Republican record," says Peter Meade. "The best way for them to do that is to co-sponsor legislation with Senator Kennedy."

For a clue to how Kennedy will perform during the next session, watch his work with fellow New Englander Jeffords on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. The strength of that relationship could dictate the extent of any major health reforms in the Senate during the next two years -- including prescription-drug reform.

"Kennedy's always shown an ability to work with Senator Jeffords on health issues," says Jeffords spokesman Erik Smulson. "Kennedy shows an ability to ratchet up the rhetoric on the one hand, but work with Republicans on the other."

OF COURSE, the combined clout of the New England Republican moderates and the Democratic warhorses, such as Kerry and Kennedy, means one thing -- money, whether it's funding for the embattled Amtrak train system, assistance for dairy farmers, or more aid for home heating oil. The region's players could help bring home the bacon during the next two years. And don't forget about the economic engine for much of the region -- the universities.

"Seniority spells federal funding for home states. Committee assignments translate into federal bucks," says Smulson. "Obviously Senator Kennedy and Senator Kerry do a terrific job in terms of bringing home bucks. I think New England has a very loud voice in the Senate."

Kennedy, in particular, will try to enlist fellow Democrats and moderate Republicans in an attempt to get Bush -- if he ends up in the White House -- to live up to the compassionate part of his "compassionate conservative" agenda, aides say.

After two terms of Clinton, the Contract with America, and the impeachment fight, Americans are hoping that the next four years are less partisan. The current fight in Florida seems to suggest that these hopes are utopian. But one fact remains. Anyone who wants to accomplish anything in a Senate divided 50-50, or nearly so, will have to come through New England. Everyone might be paying more attention to old-fashioned Yankee politics.

Seth Gitell can be reached at sgitell[a]phx.com.