Viciousness in politics possible factor behind senators’ exit

U.S. senators rarely leave those jobs voluntarily. Either the voters toss them or they die in office. Voluntarily surrendering power isn't part of their nature.

In Nevada, Alan Bible, Paul Laxalt and Richard Bryan come to mind in recent history as among the few senators who departed the Club of 100 by choice.

So when U.S Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Byron Dorgan of North Dakota said they won't run again in November, and when Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter said he wasn't going to run again, it looked like a tsunami was pulling the three Democrats out to sea.

Dodd knew he most likely would lose his race. Dorgan wasn't as vulnerable and said he stepped down because he had "other interests." Ritter said his family needed him.

Bryan, who decided not to run again in the 2000 election, knows exactly what happens next after a politician announces retirement.

First, the public wonders whether you're sick.

Or if a scandal is about to unfold.

Then the news media speculate how it will affect the balance of power. Or, in Nevada's case, what happens to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's much vaunted power if he's re-elected but no longer has a filibuster-proof caucus of 60 senators?

When Bryan decided to retire, he said it was to spend more time with family. While that has become a cliché in political circles, it was true. He had no health problems, no scandal broke. And he went to work as an attorney at Lionel Sawyer & Collins and is making the money he didn't make while he was in public life.

Bryan agreed with me Wednesday that perhaps there's another reason the two senators are stepping down. It's the same reason that contributed to his own decision -- the escalating ugliness and viciousness of partisan politics. And it's only become worse since he left office 10 years ago.

After all, Democrats aren't the only ones calling it quits. Last year, six Republican senators said they wouldn't run again -- senators in Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Ohio, Missouri and New Hampshire.

Quite possibly, the venomous, hateful aspect of politics is driving senators of both parties to say: I'm tired of this. Enough.

"I thoroughly enjoyed my years of public service. I worked hard. But it became so confrontational and much more difficult to serve in the Senate," Bryan said.

"It certainly will be challenging for the Democrats to retain control of the Senate," Bryan said. "Clearly the momentum which was running in favor of Democrats in 2006 and 2008 ... right now appears to be building momentum for the Republicans."

Bryan wasn't as surprised by Dodd's decision as by Dorgan's.

Dodd was clearly vulnerable after nearly 30 years and a scandal involving a Countrywide loan. But Dorgan hasn't been tainted by scandal and has won election with wide margins during his nearly 24 years in the Senate, but he might have been challenged by a popular GOP governor.

Maybe Dodd and Dorgan see the writing on the wall and don't want to go out as losers. But if, as some contend, Dodd and Dorgan felt vulnerable about voter retribution over their votes for the health care bill, why did six Republican senators call it quits last year? Is hate-filled meanness the cause?

Ten open Senate seats will give both parties plenty of maneuvering room in this next election. But the ones with the most to lose in the 2010 election are the Democrats -- and the Senate majority leader.

The GOP fired off news releases suggesting Reid should consider following Dodd and Dorgan out the door and voluntarily leave the Senate.

Wishful thinking.

Harry Reid won't voluntarily leave. It's not his nature. If he goes down, he'll go down fighting and scheming. That's his nature.

Jane Ann Morrison's column appears Monday, Thursday and Saturday. E-mail her at Jane@reviewjournal.com or call (702) 383-0275. She also blogs at lvrj.com/blogs/morrison.