Didn't Gregg play the Blago game of getting something in return for his Commerce position?
By John Amato Wednesday Feb 04, 2009 7:00amDidn't Judd Gregg play a similar game that got Blago impeached over? He wanted something in return for him to give up his Senate seat to join Obama's cabinet.
New Hampshire Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat, has agreed — in a deal struck with Gregg — to name a Republican to fill the Senate seat.
Democratic officials say Lynch intends to select Bonnie Newman, Gregg's former chief of staff, and that she intends to step down rather than run in 2010 for a full term. That would create the possibility of a highly competitive race for a seat that long has been in Republican hands.
On Tuesday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said Lynch called the White House to "voice his support" for Gregg after reports surfaced that the senator was under consideration. But Gibbs also denied that the White House had anything to do with the selection of Obama's successor. "This White House is not involved with picking who will be the next senator" or the political party of any successor, Gibbs said.
I saw Rachel Maddow mention that he voted to abolish the position altogether back in '95. John Lynch could have picked anyone at all to replace him. It's his prerogative, but Gregg demanded that the Democratic governor choose a Republican to fill his seat. Wouldn't that be good enough for a Patrick Fitzgerald type to get involved? I'm just sayin'. Gregg should have taken the job without any preconditions if he wanted it.
“But the apparent behind-the-scenes deal-making that went on to determine who will fill Senator Gregg's vacancy is alarmingly undemocratic. Once again, Americans will be represented in the Senate for nearly two years by someone they had no hand in electing. As the number of Senators appointed to their seats continues to rise, it’s increasingly clear that we need to fix this constitutional anachronism. It is time to pass a constitutional amendment to end appointments by governors and the political gamesmanship they encourage.”
Login or Register to post comments.
Right of the bat I can say 'dealing' is different than 'selling'
Also (and bear in mind I'm only arguing the concepts. I don't know enough about the specifics to judge) lets say Gregg says, "Well I want the position but it'd hurt my party (which equates my principals) to take the job. So I'll only take it if a repub is named as my replacement." I don't think there is anything wrong with that sentiment. Certainly nothing illegal. Then take Gov. Lynch who says "Ok, I respect that view and the will of the voters who voted for a repub for that seat last go around so I'll appoint a repub I deem worthy of the seat."
If thats what went down, I don't see how it can be compared at all with what Blago did which was essentially: Pay me to pick the specific candidate you want.
...Gregg says, "Well I want the position but it'd hurt my party (which equates my principals) to take the job. So I'll only take it if a repub is named as my replacement." I don't think there is anything wrong with that sentiment...
I don't either. Frankly, I'd WANT my representative to be more responsible than to just vacate a seat to be filled with someone from the opposite party. What, I vote for the guy and then he bails to further his own career without any thought to his constituents?
btw, the notion that there isn't strategy, gamesmanship, handshake deals, and maneuvering in politics is like saying that water isn't wet. This, as far as I am concerned, is politics! I don't love it, but I am not going to stamp my feet every time there is a quid pro quo in Washington, for Dog's sake.
Yeah, I have to side with Gregg over this one. If I were a GOP senator asked to a cabinet scty and my appointment would result in a 60/40 majority for the opposition, Id want to be replaced by a GOP also.
But at least Obama's reaching out, although the conservative media would interpret that not as reaching across the table, but begging for help. Naturally, they'd forget that the last president to have this politically diverse a cabinet was GOP icon Teddy Roosevelt.
Dealing is not selling? Tell that to my D.A. He thinks holding is possession as well.
Judd Gregg getting something non-monetary out of his own seat is not the same as Blagonkadonk getting something monetary out of someone else's seat. That is to say - start squawking if Governor Lynch wanted something for himself like a six-figure lobbying sinecure.
Of course if Feingold's amendment goes through there is no deal to be made.
Not only was it non-monetary, it was non-personal. Gregg is not benefiting personally from who ever it is that gets his vacant seat.
..what the Rethuglicans in the House did for bi-partisanship on the stimulus bill, wouldn't it be in the best interests of all for the NH Gov. to appoint a Democrat and to hell with what Gregg wants? I'm just sayin' that,
"Fool me once, shame on you! Fool me twice, the GOP is not interested in Bi-Partisanship!"
That New Hampshire Governor is an idiot. If the tides were turned, you can be damned sure that a repuke would appoint a repuke.
If anything, this makes matters worse. Now, we have a repuke who is not at all beholden to the voters, and will probably become a solid obstructionist. At least Gregg might have been persuadable.
The only reason the republican's still exist, is because of democratic political incompetence!
The party of stupid rides again!
so many people defended the gregg nominations because of this "brilliant" political maneuver that would see a dem appointed in gregg's place, and then give the dems a super majority...
so, now, there is the same partisan make-up in the senate. and, joy, we have an anti-union, corporate-coddling, neoliberal appointed as commerce sec'y!
yay! brilliant!!!
oh wait...
I was behind it so long as the advantage tilted in favor of the Dems and Obama. As this lays out, I see no good reason to have another repig on the staff. Maybe Obama really does think this scorpion has the particular know-how to help him (oh please) or maybe, just maybe, Obama is thinking long term and how the replacement will step down, opening the seat to Dem-whoever run in 2 years.
But otherwise, I don't get it.
Republicans aren't paying MONEY to Obama! They're giving him one capitalist pig for a pig to be named later. It's called BARTER.
Of all the Blago tapes that have been released, he never says he wants to sell the senate seat for cash.
Listen to them.
The funniest party about Blago is that Fitz arrested him before he had any evidence, and is now trying to build a case after the fact. Blago actually still has a shot of being proven innocent here.
Wouldn't be the first time Fitz screwed up a high profile case that helped the Republican party out...
his record on matters overwhich the Commerce Dept might have influence is dismal:
Item: Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore.
Item: Voted YES on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions.
Item: Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy.
Item: Rated 78% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record.
Item: Voted YES on promoting free trade with Peru.
Item: Voted YES on implementing CAFTA for Central America free-trade
Item: Voted YES on establishing free trade between US & Singapore.
Item: Rated 92% by CATO, indicating a pro-free trade voting record.
Item: Voted NO on continuing federal funds for declared "sanctuary cities".
Item: Voted YES on declaring English as the official language of the US government.
Item: Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border.
Item: Voted NO on giving Guest Workers a path to citizenship.
Item: Increase limitations for H-1B, H-2B, and L-visas.
Are you starting to see a pattern here?
I wonder what positions ann coulter can get into?
of hers.
not really a comparable situation. Gregg simply said he wouldn't accept the appointment unless a Republican (as NH voters chose) replaced him in the Senate. now, if the NH governor had demanded cash or favors in exchange for agreeing to appoint her specific replacement, that would be comparable.
this whole thing is stupid on Obama's part. but not, there's no ethical violation on Gregg's part. it was a deal Obama should not have made, especially now that we know Gregg has said he refuses to vote on the stimulus bill.
so, it looks like Obama was thinking we'd get another Dem senator. that got fucked up. then you gotta figure he was at least getting a yes vote on the stimulus. now that's fucked up. and the whole thing looks ethically clowdy for the Dems, who made a very obvious, telegraphed, botched move here, got NOTHING out of it (except for a commerce Secretary who voted to ABOLISH the position once and who voted to ELIMINATE THE MINIMUM WAGE just a few short years ago).
yay.
The democrats should vote NO onn his nomination and kill it!!!
And let me say again, that New Hampshire governor is an idiot!
I agree with Senator Feingold completely. Appointments of senators by governors should be made illegal in the Constitution. Every state in the union should be required to fill U.S. senatorial seats by special direct election, no matter the circumstance. That would end the temptation of one more 'f_king golden thing'. It's one thing to have a completely corrupt government on the state level, as with the case of Illinois, but another to let that corruption further infect the Federal Government. Power dealing has been around since the concept of organized government, and sadly has become a normal part of any political landscape, but that doesn't make it right.
Obama made a decidely non-partisan decision to appoint Gregg to this post? Didn't Gregg answer with the most partisan response possible? Clearly the bipartisan olive branch is only being passed in one direction. Why aren't we up in arms!?
I'm mystified by the meme in the blogosphere, and here in particular, that seems to be running some kind of defense for Blago?
Corruption is the difference of trading self-interest for the interests of the greater good. Manipulating power to protect your favored policies and the interests of your constituents is politics.
Gregg's interests may be largely political, but at least he can make a fair defense that he is honoring the intentions of his constituents who voted a Republican into office. (I think I and a lot of people on this board would be pissed if a Democratic rep or senator bailed for a higher profile job, allowing a Republican to grab the seat and tip the balance.)
If you were making the argument about how this is yet another example of how "bipartisanship" is a one-way street these days, I'd fully back you.
But Blago's behavior was clearly self-interested, corrupted and deluded and I'm amazed that anybody, anywhere, but particularly on this site, is wasting one ounce of breath or one drop of ink defending him. He's out of office and I think the vast majority of the people of the great state of Illinois, Republican and Democrats alike, are quietly relieved.
Just because Rove, Bush, etc. are scumbags who deserve to be similarly pilloried and punished doesn't excuse Blago, who is petty but just as loathsome in his own special way.
Why do we need Gregg and why does it cost a seat in the process... I know about wheeling and dealing...
C. I don't know how Bill Richardson is feeling.
And I apologize, John, I was reacting to this as a sequel to the previous piece about Blago on here, which I now realize was not by you but Susie Madrak.
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/if-stu...
However, I do not think that Gregg negotiating for a Repub replacement is the moral equivalent of Blago seeking personal gain from an appointment. Unless Fitzgerald's transcripts were just completely made up, Blago was clearly trying to turn the appointment into a golden parachute for himself or his wife, if not for cash on the barrel head. This is a different animal than the normal horse-trading that goes on in politics and I find it disingenuous to pretend otherwise. And I think we need to keep the distinctions clear... pretending that political gain was equivalent to personal gain was what enabled the prosecution to buffalo a jury into convicting Don Siegelman on a charge that was pure BS.
But you are dead right that bending backwards for Gregg makes no sense, especially when the ongoing nonsense about the stimulus package makes it crushingly apparently that the Republicans don't intend to play the "bipartisanship" game with any seriousness or honor. If politics is horse-trading, this is trading stallions for a dried out pot of old glue.
Exactly!
And why didn't the N.H. Governor tell Gregg "you are being offered a high level cabinet post in an historic opposition administration. You will be lucky to hold onto your seat in 2 years if you run again. If I were you, I would jump at this opportunity. As for me, I will appoint anyone I wish! What's your decision Senator?"
I really am beginning to think the democrats are as politically challenged - as the republicans are morally challenged!
Blago was impeached for unethical not illegal dealings, so how is this any different.
If I'm negotiating for a job, I can impose conditions on my prospective employer. If said employer doesn't want to meet those conditions I can decline the job. I don't know why Obama was so set on Gregg's candidacy, but that's a separate issue. Comparing it to Blago is silly. Feingold's point is as germane to the appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand. Feingold is talking about the anti-democratic process of having one individual choose the occupant of what should be an elected position. I can't spare the outrage for something so silly.
I mean, all the Thugs have to do is think 'filibuster,' and the Dems collapse like a house of cards in a wind storm.
Right. I'd get that in writing, on a legally binding contract if I were you. The Thugs aren't really known as 'Promise Keepers' unless they're in an arena full of other Christofascist men and there's a preacher in front of them. And even then, it's only a show.
will he now get that coveted HHS position?
gov. lynch at least, will get a quid pro quo if the deal with gregg goes through to choose a republican senatorial appointee; he'll so alienate the registered democratic voters in his state that he'll most likely fail to be re-elected.
Login or Register to post comments.