 |
| Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) |
I don't say this lightly-I've voted for him twice, and he's my US Senator, but unless Franken can provide some other explanation for the photo, I think this disqualifies him as a US Senator. One could make the argument that there are photos of all of us that we'd prefer didn't exist, but what Franken is doing here is creepy, and coupled with Tweeden's account of him pressuring her into a kiss that she didn't give her consent toward, it feels beneath the dignity of a US Senator.
I want to clarify something, because I've seen it on social media quite a bit here, that Franken (or Moore, or Trump, or Bill Clinton) should be given the benefit of the doubt, that he's "innocent until proven guilty." That phrase works in court, but shouldn't apply in the court of public opinion, where I feel the burden-of-proof should be (and generally is) considerably lighter. If there is grounds here for a civil or criminal suit from Tweeden (or if there is an ethics violation from the Senate), that is where "innocent until proven guilty" should be applied, but a US Senator, someone in the public sphere, doesn't get out of the court of public opinion. He's not a doctor or lawyer or engineer, someone who is bound to his job through a contract with a company-he's a US Senator, who has his job because of the people of Minnesota. As a result, he should be held to a higher standard than if he's an average person. And the photo is damning enough here to believe the rest of Tweeden's story, in my opinion-it shows a profound lack of good sense and judgment, and makes me question Franken in general. This isn't a youthful indiscretion or a crime he committed as a teenager; this isn't a "youthful" by the standards of the media (which is arbitrarily your late 20's, unless you're Donald Trump, Jr., in which case it's apparently 40). Franken was two years away from being a candidate for the US Senate when this occurred, and was in his mid-50's when this incident occurred. He knew what he was doing, what the impact of it may be, and while he may regret it, his regret doesn't excuse his behavior. He should resign from a moral perspective.
2. From a Political Perspective, Al Franken Also Needs to Resign
Have you ever noticed that whenever a Republican sex scandal occurs (and lately, there have been a lot of them), the GOP will throw out "...but Bill Clinton" as if that excuses their behavior. This is ludicrous, partially because two harms don't make a right, to use the adage, but perhaps more so because Bill Clinton hasn't held political office in sixteen years. Yes, he is still a prominent member of the party (I would advise that we reconsider having him speak at future DNC's all-things-considered at this point), but he hasn't run for office in over two decades. You can say his wife did, but I find it a morally bankrupt argument to blame a woman for her husband's misdeeds, and Hillary Clinton has never had a credible attack on her character in terms of adultery, harassment, or a more serious crime like assault. Bringing up Clinton is the equivalent of saying "but Ronald Reagan" or "but JFK" or "but Warren G. Harding" at this point in my opinion.
Franken, though, is different. He's a sitting US Senator, someone who stood for reelection just three years ago and is someone who is a current member of the Democratic Caucus in Congress. Saying "...but Al Franken" has some validity now, because Democrats can't claim the moral high ground on an issue like harassment if they have a man who has been accused of (and photographed doing) what Franken did to Tweeden. You can make the (not entirely without merit) argument that Roy Moore is worse, considering his actions would constitute multiple felonies and that he has a series of women who have accused him of these acts, rather than (as of now) just one woman in the case of Franken. But there's nuance and then there's line-crossing, and I think this is a case where a line was crossed with both men, even if Moore went further over that line. Without some sort of proper explanation (other than bad judgment), it's hard to find a way to not group Franken in with the likes of Trump, Clinton, and Moore now; he was a man in his mid-50's who had non-consensual contact with a woman. When Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson, and Rush Limbaugh bring this up, they'll bring it up without drawing the obvious line that men they defend are also guilty of similar misdeeds, but they won't be wrong in attacking Franken.
 |
| President Bill Clinton (D-AR) |
I wrote yesterday about Jonathan Chait's New Yorker article, and how Democrats when given the opportunity to prove that they'd act differently in the face of Trump or Moore, would act differently, and I meant it, and I hope that they do (so far near universal calls from senators for an ethics investigation seem to indicate that they're closer than the "if this is true" initial responses about Moore, though I'd honestly like them to go further as I think Franken should resign), but I won't entirely dismiss Chait's perspective that there isn't a political cost to a politician resigning, even if I think that the political cost shouldn't outweigh what is morally sound.
In this case, though, honestly, the political cost isn't that much for the Democrats, even if it's obviously a huge cost for Franken, who until this morning was a major player in the Democratic Party whom many thought could be a contender for the presidential nomination in 2020. That's because Franken's replacement will be a Democrat (by virtue of Minnesota's governor being a Democrat), and because Minnesota in 2018 will probably be a pretty blue state. Franken staying on means constant scandal, hanging an albatross around every Democrat who is running in 2018, and a wounded politician who will almost certainly have to retire in 2020, as it's doubtful he'll be able to win a primary again in a state like Minnesota. There is no loss of seat here, there's no impact on any debate in Washington, and the math for 2018 doesn't get that much harder here as it's unlikely the Republicans are able to score the seat of Gov. Mark Dayton's replacement due to the Gopher State's blue tint. It shouldn't be the mitigating decision factor, but this isn't the same as if, say, Joe Manchin was accused of this action where he's the only person capable of winning the seat-Franken's much easier to cut loose. It seems seedy to point this out, but honestly it's not a rock-and-a-hard-place here, it's a rock-and-an-easy-exit.
The Democrats probably should do well to remember that had Bill Clinton resigned in 1998, they would have held the White House with a President Gore. Gore was morally on a different plane than Clinton, the economy was in good shape, and the Republicans wouldn't have been able to hang Clinton's moral deficiencies around his neck the way they did in 2000 because Gore would have proved himself to be his own man by that point. Imagine a world where George W. Bush was never president, and remember that not resigning has just as many ramifications as resigning does. And let's be really honest here-in hindsight, Bill Clinton should have resigned. His behavior with Monica Lewinsky was beneath the dignity of the White House, less because he had an affair and more because she worked for him which made what he did sexual harassment, not to mention the very serious and consistent allegations that came from Juanita Broaddrick.
4. Keith Ellison Should Not Replace Franken
This is putting the cart before the horse, but if Franken does resign (and, again, I think that he should unless someone can provide a big hole in this story fast, which doesn't seem possible now considering Franken's statement a few moments ago), he should not be replaced by Keith Ellison. I know that the internet has a love-in for Ellison, but A) he's not the only Democrat in Minnesota B) his politics may be arguably too liberal for a state that went to Hillary Clinton by less than 2-points) and C) I think, considering the allegations against Franken, that a female politician should take the place of the senator.
Identity politics is occasionally a sticky issue, but this feels like an open-and-shut case for them in my opinion. The state has a number of prominent, very qualified female politicians to take Franken's place. Off-the-top-of-my-head, Lt. Gov. Tina Smith, State Auditor Rebecca Otto, State Attorney General Lori Swanson, and Rep. Betty McCollum all come to mind (though McCollum's appointment would leave a House seat open in an environment where we may need her vote in the House), and with the former three, they've proven before that they can win statewide, so 2018 wouldn't be an issue. I think sending a message that we need more women in Washington (because we do, as this and dozens of other issues have shown), would best be aided by actually sending another woman to Washington.
5. We All Need to Take a Harder Look at Ourselves
The Franken allegation is a reminder that all men need to remember to look at their actions not just from what they assume people are comfortable with, but also to remember their position and what may feel "funny" or "not that big of a deal" can in fact be a big deal. I will admit I am shocked by these allegations in a way I wasn't for Moore, Weinstein, or Spacey before him. I had admired Franken's work as a public servant, and as I mentioned above, have voted for him twice. That someone who counts himself as an ally of women could do such things, particularly in a professional setting, is shocking to me, and while you may not have done the things that Franken has been accused of here, it's important to remember to ask yourself, particularly men, how can I be a better ally and are there any actions I have taken that might make someone uncomfortable, and adjust our behaviors. Everyone taking a look at themselves, and not just casting stones, is how we solve this problem permanently.
No comments:
Post a Comment