Understanding Joe Manchin

Understanding Joe Manchin
© Getty Images

In bastions of blue in New York and California, I hear variations on this question: “Why did Joe ManchinJoseph (Joe) ManchinTrump's trial a major test for McConnell, Schumer Poll: West Virginia voters would view Manchin negatively if he votes to convict Trump Pelosi set to send impeachment articles to the Senate next week MORE, a Democrat, vote to confirm Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughDemocratic group plans mobile billboard targeting Collins on impeachment January reminds us why courts matter — and the dangers of 'Trump judges' Planned Parenthood launches M campaign to back Democrats in 2020 MORE to the Supreme Court?” The question comes through pulsating necks and locked jaws, asked in tones of incredulity and shock.

In October 2016, I stood with Sen. Manchin (D-W.Va.), along with Sens. Heidi HeitkampMary (Heidi) Kathryn HeitkampSusan Collins set to play pivotal role in impeachment drama Pro-trade group launches media buy as Trump and Democrats near deal on new NAFTA The Hill's Morning Report — Biden steadies in third debate as top tier remains the same MORE (D-N.D.), Claire McCaskillClaire Conner McCaskillThe most expensive congressional races of the last decade McCaskill: 'Mitch McConnell has presided over absolutely destroying Senate norms' Claire McCaskill: Young girls 'are now aspiring' to be like Warren, Klobuchar after debate MORE (D-Mo.) and a few others, in one of the most dangerous places on the planet, the demilitarized zone that separates South Korea from North Korea. Manchin led the delegation, and I was the only lowly House member.

ADVERTISEMENT

Now Republicans think they’ve placed many of those same senators on even more perilous territory, on the wrong side of a Kavanaugh vote in states that solidly support President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump rails against impeachment in speech to Texas farmers Trump administration planning to crack down on 'birth tourism': report George Conway on Trump adding Dershowitz, Starr to legal team: 'Hard to see how either could help' MORE. The thinking is that voting for Kavanaugh would gut the small Democratic bases in those states, while voting against would energize Trump supporters.

Putting aside the more vital issue of using a lifetime Supreme Court nomination as a partisan wedge right ahead of midterm elections, how does one explain the considerations those senators made in approaching the vote on Kavanaugh? Is it about party, principle, or the people they represent? What goes into the political calculus of defeating a judicial nominee or losing more Democratic Senate seats?

To understand his vote, you have to understand Manchin. He is, on principle, a conservative Democrat. It is part of his value system. No one should be surprised by his record because it is reliably right of center. He never pretended to be anything else. (Disclosure: I’m friendly with Manchin, Heitkamp and McCaskill. I’ve raised money for each of them but have not discussed with any of them what motivated their votes.)

By the way, that is what got him elected in a state that Trump carried by more than 42 points, a state whose Democratic governor switched to the Republican Party, and also endorsed Manchin’s reelection. If Democrats have any hope of winning back at least some of those now hardcore Republican voters in Charleston, Huntington or Wheeling, a guy like Manchin will have to design and engineer the bridge.

But what about voting like a Democrat, I hear you say? Certainly a fair point. If politics was removed from the imperative of actually winning elections, Manchin could vote in a way he felt irreflective of his constituency and his values, and then Senate Democrats would potentially have one less vote to replace Mitch McConnellAddison (Mitch) Mitchell McConnellDemocrats worry a speedy impeachment trial will shut out public George Conway group drops ad seeking to remind GOP senators of their 'sworn oaths' ahead of impeachment trial GOP senator 'open' to impeachment witnesses 'within the scope' of articles MORE as majority leader, as well as one less vote on other critical issues.

Speaking of other issues, Manchin is now campaigning on core Democratic values like affordable health care and investing in education. Slowly and methodically, he has conservative West Virginia voters acknowledging that expanding coverage for preexisting conditions isn’t a socialist plot. It’s, well, it’s good for West Virginians.

Oh, so just because he’s with us on some issues, we should tolerate him voting against us on this one issue? Not necessarily. You don’t have to tolerate anything. But could you better stomach a Republican senator voting with Donald Trump on every issue? Because that’s the most likely alternative if Manchin loses or leaves. What if he ends up becoming a Republican, like West Virginia’s governor. Then what?

I once asked Manchin about Republican attempts to woo him to their party. He scoffed: “I was a Democratic member of the House of Delegates for four years, a Democratic state senator for 10 years, a Democratic secretary of State for four years, a Democratic governor for almost six years, and a Democratic United States senator for eight years. If I became a Republican, don’t you think people in West Virginia would see through that pretty fast?”

I hope he’s right. Just not too far right.

Steve IsraelSteven (Steve) J. IsraelWith surge in anti-Semitism, political leaders need to be aggressive and reflective in response Pelosi and Schumer were right with the strategy to delay impeachment The Hill's Morning Report - Deescalation: US-Iran conflict eases MORE represented New York in Congress for 16 years. He served as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee from 2011 to 2015. He is a novelist whose latest book is “Big Guns.” You can follow him on Twitter @RepSteveIsrael and on Facebook @RepSteveIsrael.