Caroline Kennedy in the Senate

Caroline Kennedy has expressed an interest in being appointed to the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Senator Hillary Clinton's designation as secretary of state by President-elect Obama.

Why not?

Well, some people think it's a bad idea. They say her interest in the appointment is presumptuous; that this can't be about family entitlement. They also say she has no real political experience, that the rough and tumble of politics wouldn't suit her; that being a senator from New York is too demanding and too public for someone seen as a private person.

But they also know it's politically ill-advised to challenge Ms. Kennedy's qualifications for office without expressing one's love of the Kennedy family; of the deep sadness felt by her father's assassination, her mother's early passing, and her brother's death. They love Caroline, her critics say, but believe others more qualified.

Some people in politics do this because that's what some people in politics do -- offer fidelity on the one hand and betrayal on the other.

Those who oppose Ms. Kennedy tell the Governor, David Paterson, that she's the wrong choice, but at the end of the night it's his decision -- and his alone.

The question is whether the governor understands that, in Caroline Kennedy, he has the opportunity to rise above politics by appointing a person who transcends them; a person of substance and achievement, of extraordinary grace and remarkable character; a person with a deep commitment to the public interest, not as narrowly defined by the politics of running for public office, but by serving on public boards and commissions, by extensive involvements in the arts and education, by being a wife and mother, and, not least, by having faithfully honored her family's legacy of dedication and service to America - and no family has ever served this nation with greater distinction.

The charge that Ms. Kennedy has been absent from the public square is spurious. She's been in the public square, but on the other side from those consumed by politics. To those thus addicted Ms. Kennedy's appointment may be undeserved, but to most New Yorkers, and indeed to many Americans, her above politics attributes are precisely why she would be a brilliant choice. Moreover, how often does a governor get a chance to appoint someone valued as a national treasure.

It is, of course, the height of arrogance to suggest that Ms. Kennedy, by not having served in elective office, is thereby incapable of understanding the demands of elective office.

The notion that Ms. Kennedy, a Harvard and Columbia Law School graduate, who performed superbly as Director of Strategic Partnerships for New York City Schools - in 22-months she raised $65 million for public schools (she was paid $1 a year) -- and who continues to provide enlightened leadership as Vice Chair of the Fund for Public Schools, who is President of the Kennedy Library Foundation, a Director of the Commission on Presidential Debates and the NAACP Legal and Education Fund, an adviser to the Harvard Institute of Politics, and was a key adviser to Barack Obama during the presidential campaign, that somehow such a person would fail the test of public office because she hasn't been in public office, is absurd.

The argument that a person whose maternal great-grandfather, John Francis "Honey Fitz" Fitzgerald was Mayor of Boston, whose father, John F. Kennedy, was President of the United States, whose uncle Robert F. Kennedy was Attorney General of the United States and U.S. Senator from New York, whose other uncle, Edward M. Kennedy, is the legendary U. S. Senator from Massachusetts, whose cousin Patrick Kennedy serves in the U.S. House of Representatives, as did her cousin Joseph Kennedy, whose cousin Kathleen Kennedy Townsend was Lt. Governor of Maryland, who has cousins serving in state legislatures and city council from Maryland to Santa Monica, whose other cousins are involved in issues of social justice, human rights, the disabled, impoverished children, and saving the environment, that such a person doesn't get politics is an argument as empty as it is fatuous.

The decision before Governor Paterson brings to mind the story of Helen Keller, the first deaf/blind person to ever graduate from an American college or university; an individual, not unlike the governor, of remarkable achievements.

Ms. Keller was once asked, "When did you lose your vision?" She answered, "I lost my eyesight; I never lost my vision." Neither has Governor Paterson, which is why he will appoint Caroline Kennedy to the U.S. Senate.

Ms. Kennedy's subsequent exemplary service in behalf of the people of New York and the nation will demonstrate the wisdom of Governor Paterson's choice.

George Mitrovich is president of The City Club of San Diego. He was press secretary to Senator Charles E. Goodell, Republican of New York, who was appointed by Governor Nelson Rockefeller to the U.S. Senate upon Senator Robert F. Kennedy's death. He can be reached at [e-mail].

Comments

[MaryOK]

So Caroline Kennedy is a director of the Presidential Debate Commission. I found that out when I went to their web -site to express my disappointment with how those debates are run. The candidates have so much control over the format and the rules that this year, they were little more than replays of their campaign stump speeches.

I was going to look for some contact information to ask the commission to be tougher with the candidates - to let the debate commission set the rules; If the candidates don't like the rules, than they should't show up - and see how that plays with the public.

The League of Women Voters used to run the debates but they recognized that the candidates were limiting their value.

By the way, I couldn't find any contact info on the web - site. The commission aopparently doesn't like public feedback.

[standard]

How interesting that Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg's proponents offer facts and her opponents, vitriol. Of COURSE she would be an excellent choice! How devoid of reason and the embodiment of prejudice is the drum beat of lies against her.

When the Cold War ended, the Right Wing of the Republican Party turned from attacks on foreign Communists to attacks on domestic Liberals--as if both groups were enemies of the state. Today, with their candidate defeated and Barack Obama now off limits, a few rogue Clintonistas similarly redirect their hatred: against an educated, accomplished, articulate, bona fide New Yorker, mother and civic activist for no better reason than that she isn't Mrs. Clinton--and all against Mrs. Clinton's expressed wishes.

They claim that CKS is not a New Yorker. Untrue. That she's a political babe in the woods. Untrue. That there's some line to the head of which she's unfairly barged. Untrue. That any temporary appointment by an elected governor is unfair, anti-democratic and shields the appointee from standing for election and facing the voters. Untrue on all three counts. What an unseemly and losing cause that is! And what a breath of fresh air your post is.

[Bill Black]

As a so called proponent of Caroline Kennedy, you offer precious few "facts." Allow me to respond: (1) the claim that CKS is not a New Yorker. I agree, this is untrue. She is plenty "New York - enough" to represent us in the Senate. (2) She's a babe in the political woods. This is absolutely, 100% true. Before P-E Obama's campaign, CKS had not exhibited the slightest interest in politics. In fact, she hadn't voted in half of the elections over the past 20 years. Complete political novice. (3) She has unfairly barged to the head of the political line. 100% true. There are so many capable Democrats in this state who have paid their dues and served the people of New York for years in the House of Representatives, State Legislature and private enterprise. Instead of running for a lower seat, proving her worth, and eventually making it to the Senate, Ms. Kennedy wishes to be annointed to one of the highest posts in the country. How is this not barging to the front of the political line??

And for the record, I am not some vitriolic "Clintonista." I supported Obama from the very beginning. But this . . . this is not change. This is cronyism at its very worst. The selection of a Senator because of her name, and not her qualifications. It's sickening.

[standard]

As you supported Obama early on, you beat me: I'm just a converted Edwards backer. And I wasn't attempting to offer facts, just commenting on this post. (For facts on CKS's candidacy, Al Giordano's latest post sets them out rather well.)

Can not holding elective office, or not voting with religious regularity, honestly be equated with political cluelessness? If CKS "had not exhibited the slightest interest in politics" until now, as you say, do you infer that or have you had personal discussions with her over the years? Granted, she hasn't voted in every election--but is she required always to favor some nominee?

My point is that there's no official list of people entitled to assume ANY office and there's no formal "paying your dues": those are emotional arguments, not legal reality. (HRC and Mitt Romney weren't given head-of-the-line privileges. Schwarzenegger and Reagan started as governors of California.) No one has a right to office through political longevity--nor should be denied a shot at it.

I don't happen to see a temporary appointment by an elected official to fill a Senate vacancy as "sickening", but I don't doubt that you and others do. Yet if CKS were appointed and did a poor job, she'll be voted down in the 2010 primaries and never elected. It's just not all that bad a situation, IMHO. Thanks for your comment, all the same.

[maninla]

1st things 1st...Caroline Kennedy is NO Sarah Palin.

As much as I oppose CK's selection to the Senate as the replacement for Hillary Clinton because there are more qualified people and the fact that her selection in this case would reek of a set-aside and/or quota, I do give her points just for her pedigree.

Caroline Kennedy or Sarah Palin. Who do you want on your side when the **it hits the fan? This isn't even close as far as I am concerned.

BUT in this matter, I'm afraid the only reason Mrs. Kennedy's name has come up is because this seat is seen as belonging to a white woman because of the circumstances @ it's former "owner", soon to be Secretary of State Clinton.

It's just like those of us on the "left" who said the only reason Clarence Thomas was selected when he was, was because he was filling "the black seat" on the bench. That Clarence Thomas wasn't seriously considered for any of the other slots that were available preceeding his nomination to the Court is very telling. And such is the case here, to me.

If a Samoan or Asian male were vacating this seat, it's unlikely Caroline Kennedy would even be considered to fill out the remainder of the term.

There are others more qualified to fill this seat...let them.

[meko]

She is only in consideration because of her last name, money and family connections. No one with her resume (non-practicing attorney, co-author of a few books, charity board member, part-time volunteer on behalf of NY public schools) would be considered otherwise.

But perhaps all those people talking about the cost of reelection have a point. Perhaps only the very wealthy and people with relatives in government can win the senate seat in New York. Caroline Kennedy never raised money for anyone who wasn't a family member, and I doubt her friends would either.

The New York senate seat, may not be available to anyone but the wealthy. The best the common people can hope for is a relatively sympathetic plutocrat.

But I'm not giving them any of my time or money. If the senate is going to be bought by someone, they can buy it themselves.

[meko]

Oops. Forgot to mention that 6 week stint campaigning for Obama. Still, if Maloney was chosen for the senate seat, no matter how effective she'd be, I don't see Kennedy supporting her.

[glorialovelace]

I don't see her bothering to go to the polls in 2010, unless her own name is on the ballot.

[Bill Black]

I will be so disappointed if Gov. Paterson appoints Ms. Kennedy. Is she intelligent enough and capable enough to serve New York in the Senate? Probably. Is she the most-deserving or most-capable Democrat in the state? Absolutely not. Her "qualifications" do not set her apart from hundreds of thousands of New York women who are politically aware and possess a desire to serve. The only thing that distinguishes Ms. Kennedy is her surname and her stunning sense of entitlement.

She "transcends" politics? Ugh, don't make me ill.

[AnnfromCA]

Lofty thoughts, although I'm not sure they relate to her.

[meko]

That's the advantage of a private person who's never served. You can project anything you want onto her. It's like the art work in someone's head. It's perfect. But execution is always more challenging than the abstract. And we don't know what would actually happen when she's in office.

That's why I don't care for the whole "we've got to get rid of all the professional politicians" idea. New people aren't inherently more honest or capable.

[benne]

Transcending politics? We need a real politician with proven ability in her seat. She can't even answer basic questions from the press. Let's put one of the many able politicians with a proven record of achieving results in her spot.

[BSERIUS]

Would you say though that Caroline is mainly being considered because of her maiden name and not any of the above?

[pigeonca]

I just looked up Caroline Kennedy's bio. From what I can see, she co-wrote two books - which begs the question: Who did the most writing, she or her co-author? Perhaps she merely lent her name. She has a law degree, which she never used. And aside from some rich girl jobs in media and art before marriage, she has been primarily a high-level clubwoman. Not to denigrate clubwomen - they often perform magnificent deeds and raise loads of dough - but this is hardly the background of a U.S. senator.

[parisblues]

When democracy has proven to be such a dismal failure, be it in Florida, Ohio, Alaska, Iraq, Zimbabwe or wherever, what the heck! Why not give aristocracy another chance?

[glorialovelace]

Give it another chance in YOUR state, okay?

[1shrink]

I had thought that Caroline's accomplishments were extremely modest considering the advantages she's had.

I had thought that her appointment would further undermine the fading belief that merit counts in our society, fostering cynicism and anger.

Now I learn that Caroline was president of the Kennedy LIbrary Foundation!! I'm impressed!! Thank you!!

[klondiker]

I have decided that I will no longer spend any time or energy criticizing Caroline Kennedy. I am no longer against Caroline Kennedy. I'm simply FOR Carolyn Maloney.

I have spent time looking at her record, and I sincerely believe that she is the best candidate to take Hillary Clinton's seat.

In her three decades of public service to NY, she has been a leader and fighter on women's and children's rights, civil rights, and on reforming government.

As NYC Councilwoman, she introduced the first NY bill ever to recognize domestic partnerships, including those of same-sex couples. She also took a lead role in computerizing government records and contracts.

As Congresswoman, she authored what was called the "most important anti-rape legislation ever considered by Congress." She also expanded the Family and Medical Leave Act to include same-sex partnerships.

She has also written a wonderful book, raised two daughters, and serves on boards of two non-profits that focus on Parkinson's research.

Bottom Line: She is experienced; thoroughly familiar with NY issues; has been on the front lines of change. She will make a great Senator!!!

[ponderingmuch]

I have been hoping to see someone itemize Caroline Maloney's accomplishments and policies.
I have seen many posts simply indignantly naming her as far superior to Kennedy.
Yours is the first post I have seen that tells me anything specific about her.

Keep up the good work!

[Space Walker]

Can this madness stop? If Patterson selects Kennedy and anoints her to the office of senate, then i know he is truly spineless. I have yet to know how is this woman qualified to make decisions for New Yorkers. So what if she graduated from ivy league institutions, that does not qualify anyone, see George Bush as a reference as to what education along with a family name can do. Kennedy needs to stay in her fifth avenue luxury apartment and continue to look down on the lowly down trodden residents of New York. She holds no sway and neither does the Kennedy family, after all, this is 2008 and not 1960, the dynasty has long died out (no pun intended). Caroline, instead of trying to woo spineless Patterson with your sophistry, should use this time to strengthen her resume.

[DallasMike]

It's funny,

You have no problem with a Junior Senator with no experience being elected president, but you have a problem with Kennedy's experience. LOL

[meko]

Had Kennedy had a full-time job, ever practiced law, lectured at a university, written a book on her own, and/or served in the state senate, I'd have no problem with her experience.

[karela]

Here Here!!! Excellent article!

[MPeter]

Patterson may be blind but he is by no means stoopid. To publically reject Caroline Kennedy would be political suicide. She is the only surviving Heiress to Camelot, a woman whose public endorsement of President-elect Obama made a huge difference, is smart and a great friend to President-elect Obama. If Patterson has any political dream to last for a while, he had better listen to Caroline. She is smart and fit to be a NY Senator.

[ESerafina42]

Where do you think you live, MPeter, England? Why don't you move there, if you like hereditary aristocracies so much? We don't HAVE "heiresses" in this country - not to political positions, at least.

[glorialovelace]

Why would it be political suicide to appoint somebody else?

Among the many candidates for that appointment, Caroline is probably the only one that non-New Yorkers have heard of.

But those of us who live in New York State -- and who will be voting in the 2010 elections -- are familiar with the broader picture.

If David Paterson wants to remain Governor, he'd best appoint somebody less controversial than Caroline. She has made too many people angry to be a viable candidate now.