Premium Sponsor


Featured Sponsor


Our Sponsors


Ad Networks

Advertise Liberally

Buy an ad on all of the top liberal blogs with just one click.

Site Stats

TX-17: Edwards Won't Join Obama Cabinet

by: James L.

Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 2:32 PM EST


Looks like we can cross off Chet Edwards from the House Open Seat Watch. Burnt Orange Report has the full press release:

"While it is an honor to have been considered for the position of U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, I believe I can make the most difference for veterans, our district and country by continuing to serve in Congress. That is why I have informed President-elect Obama's transition team that I intend to continue representing the 17th Congressional District of Texas.

With my seniority in Congress and as Chairman of the House Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee, I believe I can do more for our military troops, our veterans and their families in my present position than I could as Secretary of Veterans Affairs. At the same time I can continue my work to improve roads, economic infrastructure and the quality of life in the 17th District, a district in which I have deep, personal roots.

While Chet would have made an excellent choice to head up Veterans Affairs, he's also the only Democrat who could hold his impossibly tough Texas district (old PVI: R+18). In fact, not even his re-election is assured here -- Edwards only pulled in 53% of the vote against a mostly invisible opponent earlier this month. Perhaps he'll fare better in a non-Presidential year, but Republicans will surely put more effort into recruiting a stronger challenger for him in 2010.
James L. :: TX-17: Edwards Won't Join Obama Cabinet
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
TX-17: Edwards Won't Join Obama Cabinet | 46 comments
He's pretty safe
"In fact, not even his re-election is assured here -- Edwards only pulled in 53% of the vote against a mostly invisible opponent earlier this month. Perhaps he'll fare better in a non-Presidential year, but Republicans will surely put more effort into recruiting a stronger challenger for him in 2010."

Doubtful; presidential elections draw out more Republican-friendly voters in the area, but in midterms Edwards' numbers always shoot up; he won by nearly 18% in 2006, as opposed to 4% in 2004 and 8% in 2008.

Though the next reelection may be the last; if Hutchison retires, I expect Chet to make a bid for the Senate.

When I saw the header
I thought about another Edwards. That would have been worse.

This idea has the same (perhaps less) merit as the appointment of Lloyd Bentsen to the cabinet. That paved the way for KBH to win the seat and keep it R for the next two decades.

Free IQ testing should be available to all those floating these ideas.

I have to ask. How does TX-17
Make you think of either John or Donna Edwards?
[ Parent ]
Did not notice TX at first

[ Parent ]
Good news.
This should put a damper on some of the '94 "Republican Revolution" talk that we are going to lose a ton of seats 2010 due to retirements and the like. If Edwards had stepped down we could have expected at least one loss in 2010. And just to make it clear, a seat like TX-17 would be exactly the kind of seat the NRCC would need to win to take back the House.
Good
I want to see Chet hold his house seat for as long as possible, then if he loses his house seat or a good statewide opportunity opens up, run for that.
Good
he's a perfect fit for the district. There are plenty of good people who could be U.S. Secretary of Veterans Affairs but there is only one Chet Edwards and he's doing a fantastic job right where he is.  
Exactly
People like Max Cleland, who's already served in that capacity I think would work just as well.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Cleland
was head of the VA. Not the entire Veterans Affairs department. And while he would be a solid pick I think Tammy Duckworth would be better.
[ Parent ]
Why the Cabinet?
I can't really see leaving an elected seat in Congress, responsible to many voters, for an appointed seat in the administration, serving at the pleasure of one person. Can't see it, sure can't see why Hillary would want to do it.

Maybe if you found you were simply not cut out for a legislative role of constant compromise, going along to get along, and felt that your true talents were executive and managerial. But on a measure of power, by measure of getting-things-done, I'd prefer to have one of 435 votes to saying, "Yes, Mr. President," or worse, having to say, "Yes, Rahm, I'll do exactly that."

Now, moving the other direction, like Mike Johanns from Secty of Agriculture in a lame-duck administration to the Senate, sure, a no-brainer.

Ya, I'm not sure why Hillary would take SOS
After the Spitzer debacle I thought Paterson would be just a seat filler till 2010 and that the NY Governor's office would be Hillary's for the taking.  But with Paterson's very high approvals it looks like he won't be challenged for the job in two years.  Hillary would be foolish to now give up a bright future in the U.S. Senate for a short-term Secretary of State job with little political future after.
[ Parent ]
I really don't see it either
Both from her perspective and from Obama's.  I think Richardson will be SoS.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Hillary would only take any position if she thought it would further her political ambitions.
I respect HRC but I just have to laugh at some of the commentators who think that Hillary wouldn't be able to run for Prez in 2016 because she'd be too old. You think a Clinton would let a silly thing like age get in the way of his/her lifelong dream? She could be 82 and walking with a cane. If a good oppurtunity presented itself, she'd jump at the chance.
[ Parent ]
I really don't know
why there are people on this site who jump at the chance to attack Hillary Clinton whenever she is mentioned.  The primaries were months ago, this is just re opening old wounds.  And another thing, this is not just a site for people who were Obama supporters.  There are a lot of people here who supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries.

"[Rush Limbaugh] is a sorry excuse for a human being and a has-been hypocrite loser who was more lucid when he was a drug addict." Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL)
[ Parent ]
Edwards
It bothers me that Obama would even consider weakening his support in Congress by making such an appointment.  I hope this is not a trend.  BTW, this is what Carter did right after he was elected, and the rest is history.
Hopefully, these are just courtesy offers
The kind where the offeree is supposed to say "Thanks for the offer, but no thanks."  Hopefully, it's just a way of extending a hand to the constituencies Chet Edwards represents: Blue Dogs, Southerners, Texans, etc.

Follow the elections in Georgia at the 2010 Georgia Race Tracker.
[ Parent ]
Carter's undoing was not..
...thinning out the ranks of Democrats in the house to fill his administration.  
[ Parent ]
Carter
Carter's undoing was the result of a lot of things and this was one of them.
[ Parent ]
Clinton did the same
He appointed Lloyd Bentson to the cabinet and we lost his Senate seat by a two to one margin to Kay Bailey Hutchinson in a Spring 1993 special election.  He also appointed Les Aspin to the cabinet, a Democrat who held WI-01 and we came within 700 votes of losing his seat in a 1993 special election and did lose it in 1994 and never got it back.  
[ Parent ]
I think the Lee Aspin
Analogy is the most apt because Aspin was unbeatable in this district(FYI: Its also my parents district and the district I grew up in), and with him gone it went back to being the 50-50 district it is, and now has a slight republican tilt with an unbeatable GOP congressman.

With that said, I'd still take the trade-off. Bill Clinton got a great secretary of defense and if it means that my district becomes safe GOP for a while, well so be it.

[ Parent ]
Let's just hope
that our national party has been burned by the consequences sufficiently to not be so short-sighted this time around.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...
[ Parent ]
If Obama picks
15 Congressman from swing or Republican-leaning district then I'd be with you.

But if its a choice between a great congressman or a great secretary of veterans affairs, then I'd go with the latter.

[ Parent ]
I May Get Destroyed For This...
But I think the next VA Secretary should be one John S. McCain III.

Before you figuratively kill me off here, let me explain. McCain may have ran the worst GOP campaign in decades, but there is no denying his dedication and commitment to the armed forces of your country. The tragedies at Walter Reed, plus the declining treatment of veterans in America, suggest we need someone who understands what it's like to come home after serving your country in combat and has enough independence to tell the President when he's wrong about the policy and needs to change it.

I think McCain can actually do that if he had the good fortune to be picked VA Secretary. He ran against Obama, so obviously he naturally fits in the role of being a rival in an Obama team (citing Doris Kearns Goodwin here), plus he's worked more in the Senate on issues regarding the armed forces better than anyone.

If Obama can get McCain in his cabinet, it would also score a political coup the likes of which America probably have never seen.

Two things:
1. It would make taking over what is (I am assuming) to be a likely open seat in 2010 and giving them an incumbent.  

2. For someone who campaigned so adamantly about freezing spending I'm sure there are better places to apply that.  Can we make him Secretary of Abstinence-Only Sex Education?  

[ Parent ]
Plus
If Napolitano had to choose McCain's successor (which would legally have to be a Republican), and assuming she runs for Senate herself, it could put her in the awkward position of running against someone she picked herself! Now, that could be remedied if she picked some creaky old placeholder who didn't want to run for a full term...
[ Parent ]
I'm thinking...
someone along the likes of Jim Kolbe.  Unless he pulls a Lautenberg, if he retired in 2006 from the House, I don't he'd run for another full term in 2010.  Kolbe would be a respectable placeholder in Arizona.
[ Parent ]
I'd go older than that
Kolbe will be 68 in 2010 -- it's not hard to imagine him liking the Senate perks enough to run for a full term. Or I'd go for a true RINO -- surely a competent liberal Republican can be found somewhere in AZ.
[ Parent ]
I might be your only ally on this Web site, but.....
I think your idea that John McCain should be named head of the Veterans Administration is an EXCELLENT idea.

Frankly, McCain was an excellent senator for several years -- before he decided in 2004 to pander to The Right to get the GOP nomination.  Currently, his legacy has been torn asunder by his despicable presidential campaign and a Cabinet position might be a way to reclaim it.

In addition, Obama should name SEVERAL Republicans to Cabinet and other high-level positions.  This nation is tired of juvenile, unpatriotic partisanship (particularly young people, who are far more mature than us older folks) and wants to see a bipartisan effort to solve problems caused by an administration that didn't give a damn about the nation.
(Obama is on 60 Minutes right now, talking about appointing Republicans.  Thank God!!!)

On another note, if Chet Edwards really is the best person for the VA, he SHOULD take the job.  The posts on this Web site are so myopic that they strain credulity.

So what if Dems lose ONE OF 435 seats in Congress?  Is that really important in comparison to having someone who can capably lead an important department that makes decisions important to MILLIONS of veterans.

The posters on this Web site are so worried about the trees that they can't see the forest.

Don't Tase Me Bro, I hope you are someone who cares more about this nation than a political party.  This post indicates that you are and I congratulate you for your post.

Shalom,
ZWrite

[ Parent ]
I think the House seat is quite important
Democrats will have about 257-260 of them, not all 435 and IMO besides the 100 Senate seats and a few Governors, there is nothing more vitally important if we want to advance a progressive agenda. It takes votes to pass legislation and no one else is likely to win this seat. He should keep it.
[ Parent ]
One seat is NOT vitally important
"(there) is nothing more vitally important if we want to advance a progressive agenda."

Yes, there is.  Competent leadership in the executive branch.  Fifteen competent (or hopefully exceptional) Cabinet secretaries is about 100 times more important than one vote.  That should be obvious after eight years of incompetent leadership and management in the Oval Office and in numerous Cabinet departments.

Think Rumsfeld.  Or Ashcroft.  Or Gonzales.  Or Brownie.  For that matter, think Les Aspin. Or Lloyd Bentsen. Yes, incompetent leadership in some Clinton Administration departments cost Democrats dearly in the 1994 elections.

My recollection is that Dems lost 50-plus seats in the House and another 10 to 12 in the Senate.  How does that compare to ONE vote?

I hope Obama goes where the talent is.  If the talent is all in the legislative branch (which is extremely doubtful), that's where he should go.

Shalom,
ZWrite

[ Parent ]
The problem
is when you start thinking that way with every seat, next thing you know you're down 10-15 seats. There are many competent people who can take that position as others have said in this post. There's no reason to give up a House seat for this position.
[ Parent ]
I've actually thought of appointing McCain.
For one thing, politically, it's relatively agreeable to the Republicans because Napolitano has to appoint a Republican, though of course she can appoint an appropriate one.  On the other hand, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that appointing Snowe is an attempt to flip the seat, and I've heard people complain that Lugar is quite conservative.

Putting McCain in the cabinet would probably relieve him.  Being in the Senate, he's under political pressure to do things the Republican Party wants him to do even if they're wrong (and even if he, too, thinks they're wrong), and he's probably quite pissed at his party for helping to sink his campaign, even if unintentionally (though we may never know if it was intentional to some extent).  Of course, McCain's best work is with military and foreign issues; putting him in a cabinet position managing veterans' affairs would put him in a position to work on some of his most passionate issues.

I have never doubted McCain's dedication to this country.  When I voted for Obama rather than McCain in the general election, I voted for a set of policies that would better serve our country, and McCain's being a Republican sadly put him on the wrong end of the torch, especially on domestic issues.

Not to mention that putting McCain into the cabinet would really be a show of making up and shaking hands.

And finally, as an additional, and ethically questionable, reason: Taking McCain out of the Senate makes the Senate Republican Caucus (if ever so slightly) more conservative--making it more difficult for them to succeed politically.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

[ Parent ]
Edwards
I am sure there are many people qualified to do an excellent job heading Veterans Administration, and only one of them, Edwards, would cost the Democrats one of their approximately 257 House seats.  If you don't think each House seat is vitally important, then why does each party spend such huge amounts of money (often more than 1 million) per competitive seat.
[ Parent ]
It is far, far more difficult to find a Cabinet head who can do an excellent job
There are absolutely NOT many people qualified to do an excellent job heading the VA.

Where do you get this from? It's preposterous.  Do you have experience running huge enterprises?  Is it way easier than I think?  If so, why have there been so many inept Cabinet chiefs?

Being the head of a department whose decisions affect millions of vets is an extremely difficult job.  It's far, far, far easier to find someone who can supervise the tiny amount of people supervised in a Congressional office (14 when I was on Capitol Hill).

One million whole dollars?  Half of Bush's ambassadors (and about 20 percent of Clinton's) got their jobs by paying that much out of their own pockets.  If a Cabinet department was an elective office, there would be far, far more money spent on it than one million dollars.

I would rather have 15 excellent Cabinet heads than a few extra votes.  Yeah, I'll lose sleep at night winning votes 250-185 instead of 257-178.  How will I live?

But I will lose sleep if another incompetent boob flushes another major city down the toilet.

Shalom,
ZWrite

[ Parent ]
Well, if you wanted to get into numbers
As a representative I think you'd have to manage a staff of several (14 as you say) people, as well as the concerns of about 700000 constituents on national (i.e. mostly non-local) issues.

As a Secretary of Veterans' Affairs I think you'd have to manage a staff of several more (maybe several orders of magnitude more) people, as well as the concerns of millions of  veterans nationwide.  You'll get more help doing it, of course.

Your point still stands, anyway, that SecVA is a bigger job.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

[ Parent ]
Thanks For The Support, Zwrite
Yeah, I sometimes feel it too when I post a topic on anything other than in relation to an election in a particular district/state, and the discussions tend to go back to such that. I was discussing mostly whether McCain should be Obama's VA Secretary, and everyone mostly talks about snatching up his congressional seat.

I understand completely the true nature of SSP, but there is a time and place for that in two years. McCain just lost an election. I'm willing to give the poor guy some breathing room and a chance for redemption. But that doesn't mean I don't see purely political motivations for my suggestion, as I mentioned in my original post.

But again, thanks for the words of support. I really appreciate it.

[ Parent ]
Well if McCain was appointed
then that would have political consequences much quicker than two years and possibly much longer by us potentially giving up a Senate seat. That's not something to play around with, let him finish in the Senate and hopefully retire. And American elections don't just begin a few months before the election date, especially in the Senate which requires massive fundraising to have a chance.
[ Parent ]
No thanks
McCain and his campaign made more absurd claims about Obama than I care to count.  McCain version 2000 I could deal with, but McCain version 2008 has become so despicable that Obama should not even consider naming him to ANYTHING.  Let him slither off into the sunset in shame in 2010, a powerless broken old has-been.
[ Parent ]
Bad idea
McCain may love the armed forces but he's got a horrible record of Veterans Affairs. If your going to pick a Republican for the post, make it Chris Smith. The Rep from NJ. He's a arch conservative and anti-choice stalwart but has a good voting record on Vets.

However if he would take it, I wouldn't mind putting him as Sec of Homeland Security. Not ideal but he's pretty good on immigration.

The likelihood of him taking such a offer is zero though.  

[ Parent ]
Oh.
Never mind what I said above though.

Maybe he'd be good for direct military affairs, though.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

[ Parent ]
by though
i mean then.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...
[ Parent ]
Smith
is essentially a religious right Democrat. Just keep him away from any position where social issues will be dominant and we'd be ok.

He's got a great record the environment as well.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
yeah, like I said
this and ID-02 should be easier to hold in the off year.  

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
You mean ID-01
Debbie Holmes defeating Mike Simpson would be beyond a miracle--practically on the order of Chris Rothfuss defeating Mike Enzi. :P

By the way, Walt Minnick was on NPR earlier this evening.

Bill Posey is not half-alligator...and is outclassed by Davy Crockett anyway: http://www.washingtonmonthly.c...

[ Parent ]
Edwards' seat
Edwards should be ok in 2010. His seat is like former rep. Charlie Stenholm's. Very republican and more republican in presidential election years. However, I see the only way of losing the seat is if either he gets redistricted again or he retires.
House Appropriations Committee
Jesse Jackson, Jr. as elected to Congress young and got a seat on the House Appropriations Committee.

JJJ was born in 1965. There are two members of the committee who are senior to JJJ and born after 1950. Edwards was born in 1951 and Patrick Kennedy was born in 1967.

By appointing Edwards to something else, Obama would conceivably create a situation where JJJ would be chair of the most powerful committee in the House for a decade or more.

TX-17: Edwards Won't Join Obama Cabinet | 46 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

Talk to your supporters, not tech support. Campaign Engine is the powerful, affordable Progressive Campaign Software.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Contributing Editor: Crisitunity

SSP's Twitter Feed

SSP on Facebook

SSP's Frappr Map

Search the SSP archives:

Sign up to receive a daily e-mail whenever the SSP is updated:

Subscribe to SSP's RSS feed: Subscribe via FeedBurner

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

Partisan Voting Index

House Open Seat Watch

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

2010 Political Calendar

SSP Race Ratings

Senate Race Ratings

Gubernatorial Race Ratings

House Vulnerability Index

Blogroll

Daily Kos
DemConWatch
DLCC Blog
Five Thirty Eight
From The Roots (DSCC)
Hotline On Call
Kicking Ass (DNC)
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Project 2010 (DGA)
The Next Hurrah
Senate Guru
The Stakeholder (DCCC)
The Thicket (NCSL)
Powered by: SoapBlox