This nation has experienced, in quick succession, two deeply flawed gubernatorial selections to fill mid-term Senate vacancies, at a time when our need for quality leadership has never been greater. The first was the naming of Roland Burris by the clownish demagogue Rod Blagojevich, the subsequently impeached Illinois governor now under Federal indictment for criminal fraud. The second was the appointment of Kirsten Gillibrand by New York’s David Paterson.
In neither case was the person chosen the one who would have been selected by the people, and at least in the New York case, there was a clearly more qualified candidate passed over. Senator Russ Feingold has introduced a Constitutional amendment that would require states to hold special elections to fill mid-term Senate vacancies, and we think the one-two punch of the Burris-Gillibrand appointments provides sufficient justification to support him.
Illinois lies outside our bailiwick, but it is disconcerting to know that the identity of a United States Senator can be determined by a suspected felon. And though Burris seems like a perfectly nice fellow, he has lost four Illinois primaries (for various offices) in a row. Not only is he not the people’s choice; apparently he’s not even his own party’s choice. So much for democracy.
Paterson, unlike Blagojevich, has been a respectable governor, and, for all we know, Gillibrand has been a respectable Congresswoman. But, like Burris, she would not have been the people’s choice, and the process by which she was chosen satisfied narrow political objectives, rather than serving the needs of the people of New York or the nation. As a result, the obvious and much stronger candidate was passed over: New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.
Cuomo came in first among New York residents polled as to their preference for Senator—higher than the media-anointed Carolyn Kennedy. He was also strongest in terms of his record and background, especially with regard to two areas likely to be of highest national importance over the next two years: the financial fiasco and health care.
Cuomo has shown both his commitment to and his understanding of health care reform in his recent suit against UnitedHealth Group Inc., which targeted conflicts of interest in setting reimbursement rates. On January 13, he made a major settlement with UnitedHealth, a settlement with national impact. Where previously, reimbursement rates for out-of-system procedures had been determined by the same companies who had to make the payments, those rates will now be set transparently by a third party—and UnitedHealth will have to foot the bill for creating the new system. In addition to being willing to fight for health care reform, Cuomo obviously knows that this nation’s health care problem is not just a matter of the uninsured, but of the grossly inadequate and sometimes fraudulent coverage of those who supposedly are insured.
Few in Washington have shown any stomach for holding to account the Wall Street executives who drove our financial system over a cliff through a combination of delusional ideology, an overweening sense of entitlement and downright greed. In contrast, Cuomo has been investigating the compensation of executives in Wall Street firms who have accepted billions from the taxpayers since last fall. Last October, he sent them letters asking for details on their bonus systems and saying, “corporate expenditures and payments, made in the absence of fair consideration by undercapitalized firms, may well violate N.Y. Debtor & Creditor Law § 274, which deems such payments illegal fraudulent conveyances.”
This is the kind of spirit and experience needed now in Washington, and looking for evidence of similar qualifications in Gillibrand, we come up empty. The consensus among commentators seems to be that Paterson chose Gillibrand because she is a woman and an upstater, two constituencies he will need to win the next gubernatorial election. We cannot afford to have the nation’s leaders chosen for the sake of such bald political opportunism.
We wish Gillibrand well, and are open to the possibility that she will prove to have the abilities and vision to make a superb representative. But if so, it will be despite and not because of a deeply flawed—and undemocratic-selection process.
Senator Feingold’s resolution proposing a Constitutional amendment requiring elections to fill mid-term Senate vacancies was introduced last Friday. It’s worth supporting. If passed, it would prevent the repeat of two mistakes that may yet cost this country dearly.
Dr. Punnybone
Think Tank
Letters to the Editor
[EDITOR'S NOTE: The River Reporter welcomes letters
on all subjects from its readers. They must be signed and include
the correspondent's phone number. The correspondent's name and
town will appear at the bottom of each letter; titles
and affiliations will not, unless the correspondent is writing
on behalf of a group.
Letters are printed at the discretion of the editor.
It is requested they be limited to 300 words; correspondents may
be asked to cut longer letters. Deadline is 1:00 p.m. on Monday.
U.S. oil companies are involved in oil and gas production with leases in many foreign countries around the world. Could you imagine what would happen to us if we prohibited foreign companies that are friendly to America, and listed on the NYSE, from having leases in the U.S.? Like it or not, all of us depend on foreign oil and our oil companies having access to produce it. We need to produce more energy in America and the Marcellus is vital for our future and to reduce our dependence on foreign oil!
