Sen. Hillary Clinton spent the day in Chicago on "private" business, fueling speculation that she met with President-elect Barack Obama to discuss a position in his cabinet, possibly Secretary of State.
Obama spent time today at his transition headquarters and at a nearby federal building. Clinton was not seen at either place, although reporters staking out Obama reported seeing a separate motorcade consisting of three SUVs leave Obama's building's garage. (Post-primaries, Clinton generally travels in a two-car motorcade.)
Philippe Reines, a senior adviser to Clinton, would only say that Clinton had no public schedule and referred questions to the Obama transition team.
"Any speculation about cabinet or other administration appointments is really for President-Elect Obama's transition team to address," he wrote in an e-mail.
Three transition aides refused to comment.
One Democrat who is privy to Sen. Clinton's schedule would not say whether Clinton met with Obama. But this Democrat did say that the speculation that she was under consideration should be taken seriously. And Democratic aides report that Clinton's Senate staff was suddenly very busy and very opaque about the reason for their activity.
That said, there is no reason, other than speculation, to believe that Obama has suddenly warmed to the idea of putting a harsh rival into his cabinet; it's not known whether Obama trusts Clinton; whether he trusts her managerial ability; whether they've reconciled personally; it is certainly true that many former Clinton aides are now working for Obama, including several of Hillary Clinton's top policy advisers.
Clinton would be a formidable nominee despite her primary battles with Obama over the direction and temperament of foreign policy. A member of the Senate Armed Services committee and as First Lady, she is on a first-name basis with world leaders and generals. News of Clinton's trip to Chicago has already made worldwide headlines.
The Secretary of State is also the manager-in-chief of a large government agency, one that has been demoralized during the Bush Administration.
Unknown, at this point, is whether Sen. Joe Biden has weighed on Clinton. Clinton certainly has weighed in on Obama's ability to handle national security crises, running an hard-hitting ad before the Pennsylvania primary that asked whether Obama was ready to take the inevitable "3:00 am" call. Clinton also mocked Obama's assertion that he would meet with leaders of rogue nations without preconditions, although the policy space between the two candidates was less than it appeared.
As the husband to the future Secretary of State, former President Clinton would be forced to disclose details about his private business dealings with other countries, and Obama's vetters would probably ask to see donor records for the Clinton Library Foundation.
« Michael Steele Announces For RNC Chairman | Main | Palin's Emergence » Clinton, In Chicago, Has Private Business, Fuels Cabinet Spec14 Nov 2008 12:26 am TrackBackListed below are links to weblogs that reference Clinton, In Chicago, Has Private Business, Fuels Cabinet Spec:
» Hillary At State from Pufferfish Comments (19)
This isn't like the VP list thing; this is real IMO. And if Clinton met with him, I think it's close to done. Anyone else, barring Al Gore, is going to look like an also ran next to a marquee name like Clinton. I think Bill Clinton would go through the scrutiny. I like the idea. 
Don't see it happening. Although, I don't understand this criticism that says Obama is hiring all former Clinton people. It's his WH personnel. He should hire people who know the WH. His policy advisers should come from the outside though.
Clinton for Secretary of State Upside for Clinton: 1) If for any reason a President Obama cannot or chooses not to run for a second term, she is well placed to jump into 2012. 2) The economy is uncertain may not revive sufficiently for voters in 2012. Taking SoS dealing with foreign issues keeps Clinton away from indirect blame. It can serve as a relatively safe port in an economic storm. 3) As a junior senator she is being shut out from any key roles, Chairmanships or otherwise that would allow her to be effective in the domestic arena. So she might as well go global. In addition, if it all goes wrong from an economic point of view, she is shielded from being a member of a do nothing Democratic Congress. Downside for Clinton: 1) Obama is manipulative and prone to use strong human shields like Rahm Emanuel to deflect from the fallout of unpopular choices. Hillary Clinton would be the ultimate human shield for Barack Obama taking flack for foreign policy missteps even when not of her own making. 2) Obama could downgrade the role of Secretary of State using it as a public relations front rather like Cheyne did with Condoleeza Rice for a while. 3) Although Hillary Clinton could always resign, she would be locked in an Obama Cabinet. She should look at what happened in Britain to Gordon Brown's chief rival, David Miliband whom Brown gave the role of the British version of Secretary of State. Miliband has been effectively sidelined, as Brown tends to do his own diplomacy anyway. Hillary Clinton would have to watch being subtly sidelined by Obama, Biden, NSC and a handful of Special Envoys that Obama could appoint. I hope she does not accept it and sits quietly in the Senate working on behalf of New York. Who knows how the economic tsunami will end. If she does accept she takes a gamble, but hopefully it will be a well calculated risk that the role will keep her out of the way of an economic tsunami. I suspect it will still be the economy stupid, even in 2012.
I'm not sure why she'd have to be State--might she prefer Health and Human Services? Clinton has a lot of formidable skills, but executive management isn't one of them....might she agree to let Obama pick her deputy, who would take the managing personnel half of the job (whichever post it is--I believe they all come with management halves) and leave her with the nuts and bolts policy half? Bill is of course still a problem. I agree with Mike that working with her after winning without her could be a good team of rivals strategy--bring to life the idea that we face unprecedented challenges and want all competent hands on deck working to fix them NOW. But I disagree about 2012--if Obama governs as though he hopes to get some stuff done in his second term, he won't get one. The time to be boldly moving is NOW, and if in 4 years he can run on "Is the nation better off now than it was 4 years ago? Are you better off?" then he'll be re-elected. If he can't run on that, no, no matter how tough the problems he's had to deal with. The same logic that said he didn't need a veep who could run in 2016, he needed a veep who could get stuff done NOW.
Cabinet of Rivals, indeed -- Obama and Axelrod continue to follow Lincoln's political playbook. There are far worse historical mentors! In general, a SOS with political clout is very good for the nation... just uncomfortable for the President. Specifically, it helps to re-tilt the political balance between State and Defense, allowing the State Department a larger stake in the making of policy. Obama's clear electoral victory (as well as his fairly healthy personal psyche, cf. Nixon or LBJ) gives him the space to bring such a powerful rival into the administration. And... frankly, such a power structure is far healthier vis-a-vis the 'Imperial Presidency' than the Cheney-model vice-presidency -- the checks and balances between the White House and State are far more predictable, even, arguably, baked into the original constitutional structure.
The Obama team, for the record, has not been leak proof. Joe Biden as VP, leaked/confirmed, Emanuel offered position of COS one week before election, leaked/confirmed, Biden's COS, leaked and all confirmed. Hillary will be great!
It's a mistake to take any criticisms Clinton made of Obama in the primaries too literally. She was trying everything she could think of to win. If Obama did pick her as Secretary of State, we would suddenly find that she agrees with talking to Iran after all. That said, I have a hard time believing he would actually pick her. She brings the same distractions as Secretary of State she would as Vice President. And her campaign clearly showed she is an awful manager. I don't see the logic behind picking her instead of somebody like Bill Richardson.
Obama would be lucky to have Clinton on his cabinet. Without the tireless campaigning from the Clintons in OH, FLA, NM and various other states- I'm not sure that he would've won over a solid group of voters that he needed in all the swing states. Look, it's pretty much a given that she should've won the Dem. Primary (and by most accounts she actually DID win- but was cast aside by the DNC and it's many shenanigans). Look, Hillary Clinton is the second most powerful politician in the country (right behind Obama)- with 18 million primary voters to prove it. Not to mention the fact that she's brilliant- and Obama would be wise to add her to his team (if she would want the job).
I think this would be a great move for all parties... Obama, Clinton, USA and the World! There is not a finer representative for our Country that could step into this role on day one and excel at repairing our tarnished image in the World. We are still #1 and we will remain #1, but we need to get out the polish so we can shine once again as the beacon of the planet. GoBama, Go Hillary and GO USA!!!
There's one simple reason I can't imagine HRC being appointed to any cabinet position. She couldn't be fired. Her political stature is too large to make her fireable. (Imagine the political fallout.) Cabinet officers are expected to fall on their sword for the President, if needed. She couldn't be expected to. That should, essentially, disqualify her.
I think it more likely that they are coordinating for a big push on health-care, drafting the necessary legislation, getting the votes in places, generally making it as smooth as possible. That to me fits better with HRC's skill-set and known interests, rather than Secretary of State, which she might not want or see as her best position.
No way on State. Too risky - strong personality, not loyal enough, angling to replace him, Bill. She will get a special commission on children, poverty (since no more Edwards), or less plausibly, health care.
Good points about wanting to redress the Defense-State imbalance (even Defense has talked about this lately), and that a celebrity SoS might help--no one ignores Hillary Clinton. As for the problems with making her veep--problem number one was Bill, and the Secretary of State's spouse plays no obvious role in the way spouse's of executive office holders (president, governor, even mayor) do. Another problem was the question of how much she cooperated vs went off script in a job that is somewhat ill-defined: are you mourner in chief or president-from-the-bunker? SoS is well-defined. Needn't be State, needn't even be cabinet--maybe they're talking money, or talking about her spearheading health care. I was going to address EasyE's argument but....the primary's over, the election's over, moving on....
Of course the form used to vet Prez Clinton might be a bit odd...
1. When I wrote the first comment, it was not reported that they'd met. It looks closer to a done deal now, that's true. 2. Deborah -- I did not say that he wouldn't be doing things in the first term. I said he would be doing many, many very difficult things that may have uncertain political fallout, at least if he's serious about doing what the country needs. If he does these things, he needs as many strong rivals/potential critics/major political figures on board with what he does, so that if he goes down from doing too many hard things, its a unity government including other power centers. Then, if by doing many very hard things in the first term he earns the second, he will have earned a much freer hand to put his stamp on things in term two. He knows the times call for bold action now, but outcomes are still uncertain. He wants his rivals and critics to be fully bought in, not standing on the outside nitpicking as he goes down.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1166.htm Bush Threatens Obama With Nuclear Strike After Attack on FBI
Hi Marc,
Thanks, and all the best,
SOS? I don't know but, has anyone else thought of the obvious? Supreme Court Justice. She's got the right background in law. Brilliant mind and actually knows the constitution. Several of the current Justices are old, sick, etc and will be retiring within the next several years. Now that's a choice and a good one at that.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I don't see this happening. But if it did, here's Obama's reasoning:
Including Hillary after already proving she was not needed as veep to win to my mind signals a radical "Team of Rivals" strategy. If the Hillary move pans out, look for more three or more Republicans in the cabinet, and if 60 Senators is off the table, Lieberman as well. He would be doing this partly just to show he can, and for the message of national unity it would convey.
But in addition to those reasons, on other way to look at this strategy would be this: Obama may see nothing but downside for the entire first term: Iraq withdrawal (framed as retreat by Repugs); Afghamistan/Pakistan bottoming out at best; possible multi-year recession/depression; have to talk to Iran at some point or look like you were bluffing; etc. etc. etc. He may want to keep as many possible rival power centers as close to all those tough propositions as possible through the first term and surround himself with basically the entire political spectrum to insulate himself for 2012. Then if he wins he can really put his stamp on things in term two.
All just guesses, of course. Again, I don't see HIllary at State. And given Marc's good point about the vetting process, maybe I don't even see her in the administration at all. But we'll see.
Posted by Mike | November 14, 2008 2:48 AM