She's "going rogue." She's broken Mitch McConnell's "iron grip" on his caucus. In the lame duck, she was Obama's best friend.
She was permitted to keep her committee assignments and seniority when she lost the Republican primary and ran in the general election as an independent, in exchange for her promise to continue caucusing with Republicans.
She has said she will caucus with Republicans in the next Congress.
So what to do about a problem like Lisa Murkowski?
We don't need her vote to maintain a filibuster. That is the beauty of 47 versus 41.
Going rogue doesn't work anymore, because a rogue vote doesn't help either party meet a benchmark. While I'm sure the Democrats would welcome her in, they don't really need her.
Lisa Murkowski is no Joe Lieberman. Her vote really doesn't get anyone anywhere now.
Is it better to keep her on board the Republican caucus with her seniority or committee assignments intact, so that she has an incentive to vote with the caucus most of the time? Or make her put her rogue where her vote has been, and set her free? Or some combination, in the caucus but without seniority or plum committee assignments (which means she'll probably leave)?
What do you say?
Poll open through Sunday, December 26.
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!