GOP Senators Feel Hometown Heat

The phone calls have been running 3 to 1 against him. He’s had to call friends all over the state to explain himself. His hometown newspaper tried to shame him with an editorial that screamed: “Jeffords Caves.”

That’s the kind of flak Sen. James M. Jeffords (R-Vt.) has taken in the week since he voted to take videotaped depositions from three witnesses in the Senate impeachment trial of President Clinton.

“I’ve been on the phone all morning with people in Vermont,” said Jeffords. “They are very nervous about it. They want it over with.”

The clamor may help drive him in a key vote as early as today to oppose House Republican demands that the witnesses now be called before the Senate to testify. Buffeted at home for his first votes on the impeachment scandal, Jeffords is not alone among GOP senators.

And as they confront the live-witness issue and other motions that could prolong the trial, many Republicans are under increasing pressure to bring the trial to a close.

Maine Delegation Feeling the Heat

Maine’s two GOP senators, Olympia J. Snowe and Susan Collins, have been slammed by their local newspapers for their role in extending the trial and for trying to devise a “finding of fact” proposal to keep Clinton from claiming exoneration.

Even impeachment hard-liners are feeling heat. Democratic officials in Ohio said that the impeachment controversy has generated interest among Democrats in running in 2000 against Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio), a consistent advocate for a full trial with witnesses.

The political pressure on Senate Republicans has turned up a notch in the wake of their first recorded votes on the scandal arising from Clinton’s illicit relationship with Monica S. Lewinsky. Although many senators for weeks had been dodging questions about the issue, they voted last week on a Democratic motion to dismiss the case, which failed, and a Republican motion to depose witnesses, which passed on a party-line vote.

The absence of GOP defections was a surprise because some Republicans earlier had suggested that they were not persuaded additional testimony was needed. Now, having voted to take depositions from Lewinsky, Clinton confidant Vernon E. Jordan Jr. and White House aide Sidney Blumenthal, a key question is whether Republican swing voters will agree to call live witnesses--a question that comes before the Senate today or Friday.

Jeffords, for one, is inclined to pull the plug on witnesses, his spokesman said.

A moderate Republican from a state that twice voted for Clinton, Jeffords earlier had waffled about whether additional testimony was needed. When he joined his party to vote for the depositions, the Rutland Daily Herald went ballistic. “Sen. James Jeffords caved in to partisan interests,” the newspaper thundered.

Irate calls poured in. Jeffords made a special effort to “touch base with friends” back in Vermont, said his spokesman Eric Smulson.

“There’s an overwhelming feeling of sadness that we’ve gotten in this mess,” Jeffords said. “They’d like to get it over with as soon as possible.”

Another Republican leaning against live witnesses is Snowe, a moderate who Democrats had hoped would vote against taking depositions. When she did not, many constituents were surprised that their usually independent senator had stuck with her party. The Portland Press Herald ran a harsh editorial criticizing Snowe and fellow Maine Republican Collins. “Mainers had hoped their senators could rise above this partisan charade,” the paper said. “Sens. Snowe and Collins let them down.”

The local press also criticized their efforts to draw up a “finding of fact” resolution to declare that the case against Clinton had been proved without removing him from office. The majority of calls coming into their offices still ran in favor of the president, aides said.

But Dave Lackey, a Snowe spokesman, said that, despite editorial criticism, constituents “trust her to make the right decision.”

“She explained herself fairly well,” he said. “She felt satisfied she could have reached the decision absent testimony from additional witnesses but that it was wrong to deny that to senators who felt they should hear witnesses.”

Chance to Challenge Reputations

And a spokeswoman for Collins pointed out that many constituents responded with anger to editorial criticism of the senators.

“Sens. Snowe and Collins have not let me down,” Cotheal Linnell of New Gloucester wrote to the Press Herald. “I am proud to have both women representing me . . . even if I sometimes disagree with the way they vote.”

Still, state Democrats see the debate as a political opportunity to challenge the senators’ cherished reputations for political independence.

“This vote showed that both Snowe and Collins were right in the partisan thick of it,” said Barbara Raff, executive director of the Maine Democratic Party.

Democratic officials in Ohio also see potential political advantage in the high-profile role DeWine has taken in advancing the unpopular cause of impeachment.

Until recent weeks, few Democrats were willing to discuss the possibility of running against DeWine in 2000. Now that has changed, Democratic officials said, as DeWine has become a leading proponent of a full trial with witnesses and as he has helped oversee the depositions of witnesses.

“It’s puzzling,” said David Leland, Democratic state party chairman. “He’s logged more time on TV in the last four weeks than in the last five years combined. Other people now are looking at that seat and thinking that it’s a good opportunity.”

But one Ohio Democrat considered a possible DeWine opponent spoke of the prospect with caution, given that the ballots would be cast almost two years from now.

“At this point in time, he would be a weakened candidate,” said Rep. Ted Strickland (D-Ohio), “but it is hard to know whether there would be any carry-over in 2000.”