Anyone that knows me knows I love Vermont. Vermont has always been known for its independence and social conscience. It was the first state to outlaw slavery in its constitution. It proudly elected Matthew Lyon to Congress, notwithstanding his flouting of the Sedition Act.

It sacrificed a higher share of its sons in the Civil War than perhaps any other state in the Union. And I recall Vermont senator Ralph Flanders' dramatic statement 50 years ago, helping to bring the close on the McCarthy hearings -- a sorry chapter in our history.

Today's chapter is of much smaller consequence. But I think it appropriate that I share my thoughts with my fellow Vermonters. For the past several weeks, I have been struggling with a very difficult decision.

It's difficult on a personal level, but even more difficult because of the larger impact in the Senate and also the nation. I have been talking with my family and a few close advisers about whether or not I should remain a Republican.

I do not approach this question lightly. I have spent a lifetime in the Republican Party and served 12 years in what I believe is the longest continuous held Republican seat in history. I ran for re-election as a Republican just this past fall, and had no thoughts whatsoever, then, about changing parties.

The party I grew up in was the party of George Aiken, Ernest Gibson, Ralph Flanders, Winston Prouty, and Bob Stafford. These names may not mean much today outside Vermont, but each served Vermont as a Republican senator in the 20th century.

I became a Republican not because I was born into the party, but because of the kind of fundamental principles that these and many Republicans stood for: moderation; tolerance; fiscal responsibility. Their party -- our party -- was the party of Lincoln.

To be sure, we had our differences in the Vermont Republican Party, but even our more conservative leaders were in many ways progressive.

Our former governor, Dean Davis, championed Act 250, which preserved our environmental heritage.

And Vermont's Calvin Coolidge, our nation's 30th president, could point with pride to his state's willingness to sacrifice in the service of others. Aiken and Gibson and Flanders and Prouty and Bob Stafford were all Republicans, but they were Vermonters first. They spoke their minds, often to the dismay of their party leaders, and did their best to guide the party in the direction of those fundamental principles they believed in.

For 26 years in Washington, first in the House of Representatives and now in the Senate, I have tried to do the same, but I can no longer do so as a Republican. Increasingly, I find myself in disagreement with my party. I understand that many people are more conservative than I am and they form the Republican Party. Given the changing nature of the national party, it has become a struggle for our leaders to deal with me and for me to deal with them. Indeed, the party's electoral success has underscored the dilemma that I face within the party.

In the past, without the presidency, the various wings of the Republican Party in Congress have had some freedom to argue and influence and ultimately to shape the party's agenda. The election of President Bush changed that dramatically.

We don't live in a parliamentary system, but it is only natural to expect that people like myself, who have been honored with positions of leadership, will largely support the president's agenda.

And yet, more and more, I find I cannot. Those who don't know me may have thought I took pleasure in resisting the president's budget or that I enjoyed the limelight. Nothing could be further from the truth. I had serious substantive reservations about that budget, as you all know, and the decisions it set in place for the future.

Looking ahead, I can see more and more instances where I'll disagree with the president on very fundamental issues -- the issues of choice, the direction of the judiciary, tax and spending decisions, missile defense, energy and the environment, and a host of other issues, large and small.

The largest for me is education. I come from the state of Justin Smith Morrill, a U.S. senator from Vermont who gave America its land grant college system. His Republican Party stood for opportunity for all, for opening the doors of public school education to every American child.

Now, for some success seems to be measured by the number of students moved out of the public schools.

In order to best represent my state of Vermont, my own conscience and principles I have stood for my whole life, I will leave the Republican Party and become an Independent.

Control of the Senate will be changed by my decision.

(SPEECH INTERRUPTED BY CHEERS)

I'm sorry for that interruption, but I understand it.

I will make this change and will caucus with the Democrats for organizational purposes once the conference report on the tax bill is sent to the president. I gave my word to the president that I would not intercept or try to intervene in the signing of that bill.

My colleagues, many of them my friends for years, may find it difficult in their hearts to befriend me any longer. Many of my supporters will be disappointed, and some of my staffers will see their lives upended. I regret this very much.

Having made my decision, the weight that has been lifted from my shoulders now hangs heavy on my heart, but I was not elected to this office to be something that I am not. This comes as no surprise to Vermonters, because independence is the Vermont way.

My friends back home have supported and encouraged my independence. I appreciate the support they have shown when they have agreed with me, and their patience when they have not. I will ask the support and patience again, which I understand will be very difficult for a number of my close friends.

I have informed President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Senator Lott of my decision.

They are good people with whom I disagree. They have been fair and decent to me, and I have informed Senator Daschle also of my decision. Three of these four men disagree with my decision, but I hope each understood my reasons. And it's quite entirely possible that the fourth one, with my independence, may have second thoughts down the road. But anyway, that's the way it is.

I have changed my party label, but I have not changed my beliefs. Indeed, my decision is about affirming the principles that have shaped my career. I hope that the people of Vermont will understand it. I hope in time that my colleagues will as well. I am confident that it is the right decision.

-- Dumbya Agenda Ain't Gonna Happen (ain't@writhing.com), May 24, 2001

Answers

I think its great that the Democrats now control the Senate. The buck is now on them to prove why they should retain or expand their power in the Senate in 2002. They might try to blame the Repblicans if they are ineffective, but how can they, after all they now have the majority of seats.

-- Dr. Pibb (dr.pibb@zdnetonebox.com), May 24, 2001.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- "I am sorry to see Senator Jeffords, an independent, principled Senator, leave the Party. Despite occasional policy differences between us, I have long respected Jim Jeffords' integrity, and his conscientious service to his constituents and to the nation. He placed what he perceived as the national interest before partisan or personal interests, and though we may disagree over whether his positions on one or another policy question were the right course for our government or the country to take, he held those positions honorably and bravely. I wish him well and I look forward to continuing to work with him on issues important to our country.

"Although we have lost our majority in the Senate, I do believe Senator Jeffords' departure can have a positive impact on how our party responds to members who occasionally dissent from party orthodoxy. For his votes of conscience, he was unfairly targeted for abuse, usually anonymously, by short-sighted party operatives from their comfortable perches in K Street offices, and by some Republican members of Congress and their staff. Perhaps those self-appointed enforcers of party loyalty will learn to respect honorable differences among us, learn to disagree without resorting to personal threats, and recognize that we are a party large enough to accommodate something short of strict unanimity on the issues of the day. Tolerance of dissent is the hallmark of a mature party, and it is well past time for the Republican Party to grow up."

-- Sen. John McCain (tells@truth.com), May 24, 2001.

As long as the tax cut gets passed I don't care a whit Bush's agenda getting stalled. If the tax cuts go through I'm sure there will be a handful of socialists here crying up a storm.

-- libs are idiots (moreinterpretation@ugly.com), May 24, 2001.

Vermont is being corrupted by wealthy yuppie squishes like Ben and Jerry. They elect Socialist Congressman Bernie Sanders. They elect wimp-out Senator Benedict Jeffords. They are no longer the Granite state; they are the jello state. Robert Frost rolls in his grave.

Can New Hampshire be far behind? Will "Live Free or Die" yield to "Live For Free or Cry"?

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), May 24, 2001.

Lead to gold:

Would you like some cheese with that whine. I can send a good Vermont Cheddar. :)

Very,

Bemused

-- Bemused (Bemused@comedy.xxx), May 24, 2001.

Bemused,

I'd love some good Vermont cheddar but I think they switched to warm brie.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), May 24, 2001.

Lead to Gold:

You said, "I'd love some good Vermont cheddar but I think they switched to warm brie"

You have to get this straight. Warm brie my foot. It is baked brie, garlic roasted in olive oil and served with a hummus based dip and apricot almond bread.

A description of Burlington; things haven't changed much in Norton.

Very,

Bemused

-- Bemused (Bemused@comedy.xxx), May 24, 2001.

Sorry, I just nuke the gook.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), May 24, 2001.

I have decided to move to Vermont. It's getting so tasteless here.

-- (MarthaStewart@bred_to_breathe.brie), May 24, 2001.

In their typical style, Dumbya and his staff of major league assholes made all kinds of threats against Jeffords because he stood up for what was right. Now the dumbshits got what they deserve, serves them right!

-- (cheaters@never.win), May 24, 2001.

Jeffords has always appeared to be a little burnt-out to me. But then, politicians in Vermont are having a difficult time connecting with their constituents these days. I offer as example the flip-flop- flip transpiring over the gay ‘union’ issue.

I don’t think this Democratic majority in the Senate will survive any longer than Ted Kennedy’s next fasting period. The Republican’s are secretly thrilled to see Jeffords make that move for it will now help justify the upcoming party switches that will benefit the GOP. So I say to Tom, Ted, and the rest of you liberal loonies……don’t be runnng off to the print shop just yet.

-- Telling It (like@it.is), May 24, 2001.

This is the best thing that can happen to the nation. Now that the people who care are in charge gas prices will plummet, the energy crisis will be solved, and the economy will improve.

-- dumbya take to the woodshed (he'll@lose.2004), May 24, 2001.

The Only reason Jefford's switched is he is planning on running for Governor and the queers won't vote Republican. They are the people he has been and is courting.

-- Marg (okay@cutaway.com), May 24, 2001.

Marg:

From what people have been saying about you, I guess that means you will be throwing your vote his way. Of course it is just a rumor.

Very,

Bemused

-- Bemused (Bemused@comedy.xxx), May 24, 2001.

Troll, Ya Think? (Now that was....a stupid question, wasn't it).

-- Marg (okay@cutaway.com), May 24, 2001.

Once again Marg, you have hit the nail on the head. For the most part, the Democratic Party voter demographics are choked with the dysfunctional, dyslectic (was it Gore or Bush or Buchanan?), delusional, and demonic losers in our society. Many of them, regular visitors to this forum. The pimp politicians would bend over for the Devil to gather a majority of their votes. This is the horror that awaits our society in the not too distant future. God help us all.

-- Jeffords (is@sorry.pimp), May 24, 2001.

" it is well past time for the Republican Party to grow up"

John McCain

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/05/24/mccain.reax/index.html

-- (grow up you @ disgusting. childish repugnants), May 24, 2001.

"Jeffords (is@sorry.pimp)"

Look how quickly the Repugligoons are ready to stab their own in the back!

The sorriest sacks of shit on this planet are the bottom-feeding Repugligoons and their degenerate man-child leader Dumbya.

Thank God we now have intelligent caring people to keep them in check before they destroy the world.

-- (Dumbya is a child @ in a. man's body), May 24, 2001.

Yep, our problems are going to be solved now.

-- Happy Days Are Here Again (yes@they.are), May 25, 2001.

"Now that the people who care are in charge gas prices will plummet, the energy crisis will be solved, and the economy will improve"

The above was brought to you complements of a moron. Yep, all we need is "caring" and everything will be okay. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

-- libs are idiots (moreinterpretation@ugly.com), May 25, 2001.

At first, I thought this wouldn't matter much. It isn't as though Cheney has been asked to play tie-breaker with most votes in the 60ish-30ish range. Then I read of all the Committees that would change hands. Committees play an important role, in that if something doesn't pass in Committee, it isn't even put on the Senate floor for a vote. Of particular interest is the Judiciary Committee, the chair of which would again be Leahy. [Did I spell his name right?]

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), May 25, 2001.

Sen. Jeffords is certainly not the first to ‘switch’ parties during his term in office but I have a problem with the basic tenets of elected public service. This man was supported by the Republican Party and ran under the Republican ticket. That is the platform that his constituents elected him on. I suggest there should be laws against an elected official changing parties during their elected term.

If you think this dance is over then a very rude awakening awaits. This move by Jeffords will initiate some other ‘Party Shifts’ and result in major upheavals in our Government.

-- So (cr@t.es), May 25, 2001.

Marg you ignorant hoe. You call yourself a christian. Give that a rest. Tell us is there anyone/anything you do like? Besides yourself of course. Is it true you are gay? It would appear not. But then again you could always be a closet case. My money is on you being a self professed christian struggling with homosexuality. A very demented one at that. I choose not to call you a christian no more because real christians dont say the things you do. You are evil and belong over at Dennis board. Move along hoe. If you are a true christian, prove it. For now you have shown all of us here by your own words you are nothing more than a talker, not a walker.

-- marg is a skank (cut@this.hoe), May 25, 2001.

IMO, the model for party-switching is Phil Gramm who was a Democrat from TX. When he switched parties, he resigned and ran again as a Republican and won. Could Jeffords win as a Democrat? Probably, but he owes the voters of Vermont the chance to prove it.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), May 25, 2001.

I agree that this type of move should not be allowed. It amounts to a switch in leadership for the country without the voters' approval. Does anyone know if this has happened before?

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), May 25, 2001.

Buddy you left yourself open on that one. The libs will say, YEAH! AL GORE! I agree that Phil did it the right way, resign first then run under the new ticket.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 25, 2001.

Oh I seem to have pissed off a Troll!Haaaahhhaaabbbwwwwaaahhaaaaaaaaaaa

What bothers you so much ????hhhhmmmmmm?

-- Marg (okay@cutaway.com), May 25, 2001.

On the contrary, no matter what you believe about our recent election, their was a process and we have a legal President. In this case, the only thing that can revoke Senator Jefford's move is a recall election. I don't like this precedent one bit.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), May 25, 2001.

Marg I dont think much of anything bothers us. Just your constant gut wrenching bullshit. Claiming to be one thing and speaking like the skank you are. Other than that why should anyone give a damn what you think, say or do? Just responding to your post is all. In your words and that of a famous lady we all remember well bwwwahhhhahhhhhaaaa. Feel better now?

-- margot ie troll (the@truth.of), May 25, 2001.

Stamp your feet and whine louder you stupid fucking repugs! I love it. dumbya screwed Jeffords in the butt and Jeffords screwed dumbya twice as hard. It figures all you right wing whiny assed repugs would cry about it. Its not fair! well, GET OVER IT! bwaaaaahaaaaaa bwwaaahaaaaa Marg, don't listen to the trolls, even if you are a big ho.

-- Tony Baloney (Fuck the@repugs.com), May 25, 2001.

After thinking long and hard about Tarzan's dick, I've cum to the conclusion that it could save the world.

-- Maria (obse@ssive.com), May 25, 2001.

This is not about differences of opinion or philosophy. It is about a guy(Jeffords) who can no longer be part of an administration who daily tells the majority of Americans to fuck-off.

A guy so lacking in basic life skills, he actually thinks it good- form to tell like California to go-to-hell. Leadership? not by any measure. What difference does it make "who is too blame"? There is a Crisis, we need leadership at the Federal level. Just telling Cali to go away is not gunna fly. One would hope they understand this OBVIOUS fact, but no they don't give a crap. They know the consequences and say to America, screw-off, pay us. Even has the balls to tells us we can use the freaking tax cut he gunna give us to pay for the criminal increases.

Sorry we have an administration in the WH which is majorly defective.

I hope others will jump ship and tell these freaks, fuck-you as well.

-- (pinhe@d.detector), May 25, 2001.

If you had listened to his words, you would realise he is saying what we all know, Bush made a lot of campaign promises about working together with democrats, making children a priority, helping seniors with their prescriptions, etc, which he has shown to be nothing more than lies to convince people to vote him into office where he can impliment his true agenda of catering to big business, especially the energy interests.

The man out and out lied about his agenda and has made little attempt to pretend otherwise.

It is impossible to go along with this farce any more, even for his strongest supporters. He uses the tax cut which he spouts as an answer to every question because he thinks the promise of money will make people ignore the damage he is doing.

Sen. Jeffords is standing up for his principles, which show a hell of a lot of guts. He gave Bush the benifit of the doubt, trusted him and the promises he made, much like many other Americans did. As it becomes apparent that Bush lied, had no intention of following through with his promises, Sen. Jeffords was forced to either go along with the charade or stand up and do the honerable thing. He chose to do the honerable thing, even under the threat of retaliation by the administration.

I don't know how many have heard of the arm-twisting methods the administration has been using against those who try to oppose them, but it is happening. It was used on Jeffords, and Vermont suffered the consequences.

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), May 25, 2001.

“I don't know how many have heard of the arm-twisting methods the administration has been using against those who try to oppose them, but it is happening.”

Please tell us how a fat assed loser like you would have this inner knowledge?

-- Lay Down (on@the.couch), May 25, 2001.

Perhaps Cherri received the inner knowledge from ignoring you? Just an assumption. Get it assumption?

Did you know that moron spelled backwords is norom?

-- though (armchair@host.no couch), May 25, 2001.

Lay Down, I don't get my knowledge out of thin air like you appear to, I actually read, and usually more than one one source. For your information:

Statement by Senator John McCain on Senator Jim Jeffords

WASHINGTON - 05.24.01 | "I am sorry to see Senator Jeffords, an independent, principled Senator, leave the Party. Despite occasional policy differences between us, I have long respected Jim Jeffords' integrity, and his conscientious service to his constituents and to the nation. He placed what he perceived as the national interest before partisan or personal interests, and though we may disagree over whether his positions on one or another policy question were the right course for our government or the country to take, he held those positions honorably and bravely. I wish him well and I look forward to continuing to work with him on issues important to our country.

"Although we have lost our majority in the Senate, I do believe Senator Jeffords' departure can have a positive impact on how our party responds to members who occasionally dissent from party orthodoxy. For his votes of conscience, he was unfairly targeted for abuse, usually anonymously, by short-sighted party operatives from their comfortable perches in K Street offices, and by some Republican members of Congress and their staff. Perhaps those self-appointed enforcers of party loyalty will learn to respect honorable differences among us, learn to disagree without resorting to personal threats, and recognize that we are a party large enough to accommodate something short of strict unanimity on the issues of the day. Tolerance of dissent is the hallmark of a mature party, and it is well past time for the Republican Party to grow up."

-- Cherri (jessam5@home.com), May 26, 2001.