Cozying up to New York's Jewish electorate is one thing. Intervening in the case of convicted Jewish-American spy Jonathan Pollard is going way too far
PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
Wooing Jewish voters is as normal for a politician in New York as cozying up to farmers is for a politician in Iowa.
And why not? As a group, New York's Jewish electorate is involved and educated, and generous with campaign donations. Parts of this group -- notably the Hasidic community -- cast their ballots in blocs. But like so many things Clinton, Hillary Rodham has taken smart politics over the top.
BUSSING SUHA. In the spring of 1998, the First Lady made headlines by gumming up peace negotiations when she voiced support for a Palestinian state, though that wasn't the official U.S. position. More recently, she was chastised for bussing Suha Arafat on the cheek after sitting quietly as Yasir Arafat's wife charged that the Israelis had used chemical weapons against the Palestinians. Last summer, a New York Post story accused Hillary of calling the campaign manager for Bill Clinton's failed 1974 congressional bid a disparaging name that made reference to his part-Jewish lineage.
So Hillary -- the Chicago-born candidate for a U.S. Senate seat from New York by way of Arkansas -- has approached the fall election with more than a carpetbag in hand. She pulled into this race with a cart loaded with all manner of other baggage, including one large satchel labeled "Jewish missteps." Clearly, she has felt compelled to counteract its contents.
Earlier this month, the White House released a photo of her opponent, Republican Rick Lazio, shaking hands with Yasir Arafat almost two years ago when the Long Island representative was part of a congressional delegation accompanying the President on a trip to the Mideast. In the photo, Lazio, who had criticized Bill Clinton for shaking hands with Fidel Castro during the recent U.N. summit on globalism, is grinning as if he were meeting homegrown celebrity Howard Stern, not a newly tamed terrorist. And in Hillary's rancorous first debate with Lazio -- who seemed to morph from friendly puppy into full-grown, unneutered, underfed rottweiler -- she pointedly referred to his "chutzpah."
HIGHLY CHARGED CASE. A photo and a Yiddish word, of course, won't be enough to win over those Jewish voters who remain uneasy with Hillary the candidate. That's why Mrs. Clinton has chosen to inject herself into the highly charged case of Jonathan Pollard, an American Jew sentenced to life in prison in 1986 for selling secrets to Israel while employed as a civilian intelligence analyst for the Navy.
The argument for commuting Pollard's sentence is that even if he did receive money for his disclosures, he was well intentioned and passed secrets to a staunch ally of the U.S. The counterargument is that selling important information to a foreign power, no matter how close a pal of Uncle Sam's, is treasonous behavior and worthy of the severest penalties.
The Pollard cause celebre has engendered much gnashing of teeth among some Jewish-American leaders. The controversy almost scuttled the Wye River peace accords in 1998 and continues to be a subject of intense pressure from Israel on the Clinton Administration. According to The New York Times, New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Assemblyman Dov Hikind prevailed upon Hillary to use her influence to prevent Pollard's transfer to a federal correctional facility deemed more dangerous than the one where he's currently incarcerated. In late August, Mrs. Clinton acted swiftly to flex her unearned power, and Pollard was allowed to stay put.
In recent days, the President has harshly criticized the Justice Dept.'s treatment of nuclear scientist Wen Ho Lee, who pleaded guilty on Sept. 13 to improperly handling classified information. Lee, who'd been facing 58 other felony counts for downloading nuclear secrets, was held in solitary confinement for nine months before most of the case against him fell apart. On Sept. 15, the President suggested that despite his doubts about those draconian measures, it would have been inappropriate for him even to raise questions about Lee's pretrial incarceration.
OCTOBER SURPRISE? But Bill didn't seem to have a problem with his wife interfering in the operations of the federal prison system to further her own political fortunes. In fact, shortly after Hillary or her minions called prison officials to protest the transfer of Pollard, the President, who up until now had resisted pressure to grant Pollard clemency, said freedom for the spy continues to be under review.
Late last year, the President came under fire for freeing 16 Puerto Rican nationalists after they renounced future terrorism. The charge was that he'd done so to help ingratiate his wife with New York's Hispanic community. So an October surprise of clemency for Pollard might be a little hard to explain away.
But don't be too sure Mrs. Clinton won't try to play that card. The fact that there was no hue and cry, no outrage anywhere, over the First Lady's meddling in the Pollard case speaks volumes about what we've come to expect -- and are wearily willing to accept -- from the unaccountable Clintons.
Scotti is senior editor for government and sports business for Business Week. Follow his column every week, only on BW Online Edited by Douglas Harbrecht
Copyright 2000, by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.
Printer-Friendly Version
