Time Will Judge Mark Kirk's Vote on Climate Change Bill

Yesterday, the White House and Congressional Democratic leadership left it all out on the field in exerting every ounce of persuasion they had to muster enough votes to pass landmark climate change legislation. They succeeded - barely. The measure now moves to the Senate, where a combination of Republicans and moderate Democrats may modify it almost beyond recognition in its current state.

If Obama and Pelosi had not succeeded in passing this legislation, it would have been a major black eye for the Dem agenda, which would have come at a critical time, considering polls show that the popularity of Obama's programs (although not Obama personally) is slipping, and more Americans are leery of Obama's ability to lead the nation out of economic crisis.

Obama and Pelosi were not able to convince 44 fellow Democrats to vote for the bill - whether these Dems refused to go along because they are vulnerable in the next election and wanted political cover, or because they truly believed the legislation did not go far enough, that's probably a case-by-case determination.

But, they did convince eight Republicans, including 5th term Congressman Mark Kirk, to vote in favor.

The right-wing Blogosphere wasted no time in lighting up and denouncing Kirk's vote as a traitor to Republican ideals, given their view of the cap and trade legislation as nothing more than a astonishingly large new tax on the American people, which will further add to the bloat of government, stifle the economy, and reduce our ability to compete with the likes of China and India (which have no such qualms about moving full speed ahead with their economic development, carbon emissions be damned). No big surprise that many Republicans are disappointed with Kirk. (Heck, I even got a call from my mother-in-law in St. Louis who wanted to complain to me about it).

But, the real test of Kirk's vote will only come with time. While some die-hard anti-tax fiscal conservatives will probably not forgive Kirk, the real question is how his vote will play with the larger electorate. While the Dems will avoid crediting Kirk as much as possible, even though they needed his vote, they will not be able to paint Kirk as an anti-environment Bush-Rush-Cheney sycophant, at least on this vote. Kirk's mantra has always been "thoughtful, independent leadership," and this vote will certainly bolster his creds in bucking his party when he believes he should.

The more cynical among us will call this a soccer-mom vote, which is geared towards positioning him for re-election in the fairly liberal 10th Congressional District, or for U.S. Senate. Perhaps they are right. But in the end, Kirk has enjoyed a vast base of support from many, including Democrats, Independents and Republicans, who did not support his views or votes on every single issue. Not even TA does. But what I do know is that Mark Kirk is a brilliant Congressman that I still support, and would like nothing more than to see him stay on in the 10th, or even move up to Senate (although he'd leave big shoes to fill).

This Blog has always been more about politics than policy. Is there anyone out there that thinks that, overall, this vote hurts Kirk more than helps? Will this even be much of an issue, especially if the final measure (if passed by both houses) gets watered down to something that enjoys true bi-partisan support? I'm interested to hear everyone's view on this.