02/01/2009 (4:11 pm)
Obama Makes Bid for Filibuster-Proof Senate (Updated)
The Democrats in the Senate remain one seat shy of their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. So, President Obama announced Friday that he’s considering nominating Sen. Judd Gregg (R, NH) to his cabinet as Secretary of Commerce. Gregg is up for re-election in 2010 and stands a chance of losing in a close race; Republicans have not fared well in such races during the last 2 election cycles. New Hampshire is governed by a Democrat, who would undoubtedly appoint a Democrat in Gregg’s place — giving the Democrats their 60th seat in the Senate.
It’s a clever move, and both legal and ethical. It’s also likely to fail, because Gregg is not stupid. He’s only issued a brief statement indicating that he’s heard he’s under consideration and is honored, but sources close to him say that the only way he’d willingly allow a Democrat to get his seat is if he were dead. There’s some speculation that he could make a deal with Democratic Gov. John Lynch to ensure that Lynch appoints a Republican in his place, although that’s considered highly unlikely.
Besides, after two years of Obama and Democratic control of the Senate, it seems likely that Republicans will start winning some of those close races again.
Hat tip to Hot Air and to Patrick Ruffini, who mentioned it on Twitter.
UPDATE: Gregg did receive the nomination, and it sounds like he will accept it after receiving reassurances from Gov. Lynch and President Obama that Lynch will appoint a Republican to take his place in the Senate. Gregg claims an appropriately patriotic motivation: “We’re in a crisis, the President deserves the advisors he thinks he needs.” Of course, it also gives him national recognition. Meanwhile, it sounds to me as though Obama is angling for the 60th seat in 2010, as the appointed Senator will likely be easier for the Democrats to defeat in 2010 than Gregg would have been. It’s a shrewd move.
« « Death Threats for the No-Cussing Club? (Updated) | Main | Obama Embraces Extraordinary Rendition » »
5 Comments »
Comment by Ted
Why would Senator Judd Gregg WANT TO GET MIXED UP IN SOMETHING LIKE THIS? How much longer can Obama remain in the White House?:
The Joint Chiefs of Staff HAVE AN ABSOLUTE CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY to stand behind Guantanamo Military Judge James Pohl UNTIL OBAMA OVERCOMES “RES IPSA LOQUITUR” BY SUPPLYING HIS LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND PROVING HIS ELIGIBILITY TO BE PRESIDENT UNDER ARTICLE 2 OF THE US CONSTITUTION.
Comment by Phil
Ted,
A) Please refrain from “all caps.”
B) Obama will remain in the White House at least ’till the end of his term, barring death or unforeseen incident. The birth certificate issue is dead.
C) If there was ever a plausible challenge to Obama’s eligibility to hold office, it was not his place of birth, but his Indonesian citizenship that had the best chance of succeeding. But it’s not going to. The issue is dead. Even if you were correct about this, it’s time to admit defeat and move on. Please, for all of us. You’re doing nobody any good by hanging on to this, least of all yourself.
If it makes you feel better, yes, we’ve departed from the Constitution. That occurred many years ago, in fact; there’s no Constitutional authority for the Federal Reserve, there’s no Constitutional authority for government charity, and the Supreme Court has foisted a dozen or more plain violations of the Constitution on us through bad decisions.
Comment by Horatius
I will agree that it is a clever move politically and even legally. Ethically though, I have some issues with. The move is designed not because President Obama believes Gregg is the best man for the job (he may well be, I do not know much about Gregg), but rather because he wants to achieve a supermajority that he could not achieve at the ballot box.
This may be clever and another example of the vaunted Chicago way, but Ethical? That is another matter.
Comment by Phil
Horatius,
I would call it unethical if Gregg was not qualified to hold the job. From what I hear, he’s superbly qualified. Once the public good has been served, the rest of the criteria are fair game, as far as I’m concerned.
Comment by Frank Capitanio
Hey Phil!
I don’t have much to add to the discussion other than agreement to what’s already been said. I am totally with your stance on Gregg: not too conspiratorial but not naive either.
I personally don’t have a problem with Gregg accepting the position. Just because Obama lives out in left field, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t play with any right or center fielders, you know? I think people now expect him to listen only to the liberal agenda because of past actions (and not without cause), but we can always hope that he’s at least willing to give some air time to opposing viewpoints within his cabinet. It provides the possibility that someone with some sense–particularly fiscal sense–will not only do well for us all under Obama, but might actually sway him from some of his instinctual drive to move left. So given all that, I think it’s great that Gregg was nominated and accepted the position.
HOWEVER, I don’t necessarily believe that Obama chose to appoint Gregg simply because he wants to have a balanced cabinet. Obviously, skill and qualifications had to come into play, but it would be too naive to hope that ideological shenanigans had nothing to do with his choice. I’ve heard people comment that Obama is too weak and will be used as a puppet for left-wingers, but I’m not so sure. To me he comes across as extremely shrewd (diabolically so?), the ultimate politician, and man who really is looking out for the image and agenda of number one: himself. I wouldn’t put it past him to try and maneuver a filibuster-proof senate in this way. I’d be interested in hearing what the deal was the Gregg made with his governor and whether or not the deal will be honored. I can’t imagine there’s anything legal backing up a promise to put in a republican, and I wouldn’t be surprised if a democrat gets chosen to replace him nonetheless.
My two cents.
Frank
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
