Pritzker and Napolitano
The latest buzz is Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security and Penny Pritzger for Secretary of Commerce. Pritzker fits firmly into the model of giving the job to a friend of the president’s so he can have a buddy in the cabinet. Not really sure how that tradition came into place, but that’s the way it goes. The big change, of course, is that the president’s buddy is usually a dude.
Napolitano is a bit more of a surprise because there are considerations related to the fact that her successor in Arizona will be a Republican and that a lot of folks are also looking at her as a 2010 Senate candidate. But she has extensive experience with the department’s immigration portfolio and with aspects of its law enforcement portfolio. The department has been a mess administratively ever since being created, so her main challenge will be as an administrator to get the thing into shape and she seems to have the record for it.
47 Responses to “Pritzker and Napolitano”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 20th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Oh, and I don’t know if this is what she wants, but a short stint at Homeland Security would probably be a nice resume builder for a Senate run by Napolitano in 2010, particularly if that is against McCain.
Except that DHS is a cesspool, and far more likely to ruin Napolitano’s already strong reputation than to enhance it. And even if her time at DHS goes well, spending two years in the Obama cabinet will likely make her a weaker candidate in Arizona by identifying her with Washington and Obama instead of the governor’s mansion.
I don’t get this at all. (As opposed to the Pritzker pick, which is the least surprising selection of the entire transition.)
November 20th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Guarantee you the wingnuts will have big problems with the Napolitano pick. Last thing they want is a pro comprehensive immigration reform chief of DHS who happens to be a CREDIBLE expert on border affairs and illegal immigration. And that, of course, is what this pick is all about.
Always thinking about ten chess moves ahead, that Obama fellow.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:19 am
A beloved governor has a much better chance of remaining beloved if she isn’t the one weilding the budget axe over the next year or two.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:22 am
I wonder if the plan is to get Napolitano OUT of Arizona. Being Governor of a severe housing bubble state in 2009 is going to probably kill your politic career. Massive budget shortfalls, unpopular spending cuts, double digit unemployment, etc.
I’d want out too.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:23 am
Penny Pritzker has not a single accomplishment which makes her sufficient to be Sec. Commerce. It is an affront to all the people that voted for Obama that he would elevate an heiress to the job.
Beyond the clear friendly packback this signals, Ms. Pritzker’s only accomplishment -beyond boundling tons of cash for Obama – is her inherited wealth.
All the various boards and companies she has sat atop of are a direct result of the status conferred on her via her family’s fortune. She has no real resume for the job. This is more than unfortunate, it is pathetic.
More people should be upset by such a move.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Joe’s got a good point. I wonder how many governors, Republican or Democrat, will remain in office after slashing budgets to reflect the recession. If what MY said earlier is true about people favoring politicians who are in office for beneficial times, and punishing those who have to actually cut budgets, it would actually make more sense to get out off the governor’s mansion before you’re forced to cut somebody’s favorite program.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Being chief fundraiser for the Barack Obama presidential campaign *was* a significant accomplishment, and more than enough to qualify someone to be Secretary of Commerce. It’s not like she’s taking a real job.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:30 am
Beyond the clear friendly packback this signals, Ms. Pritzker’s only accomplishment -beyond boundling tons of cash for Obama – is her inherited wealth.
Well she could have given it to McCain or Hillary or …. Lucky for us she didn’t. For those who don’t know, the Pritzkers are the superrich family of Chicago who’s money derived from the Hyatt hotel chain.
November 20th, 2008 at 9:59 am
At least Napolitano will Lieberman around to investigate her.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:03 am
Jasper
The last thing that the Obama Administration needs during a recession and increasing unempoyment is an open borders, unlimited immigration, pro-amnesty person at DHS.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Again, the braying on behalf of pritzker does not suit a progressive well, but I have begun to expect such things.
According to the Chicago Sun Times, after good ‘ole Penny left the chairmanship at Superior Bank
Among the aftershocks of its fallout, Superior left “1,400 of its customers without part of their savings.”
This is unsavory for anyone, let alone someone tapped to a cabinet position.
I do not discount her money raising prowess, however. It is quite a skill -one which billionaire heiresses are not only predisposed to by access but well suited for as well.
But a healthy democracy does not reward rich people for how well they can raise money and nor should it look kindly upon people who pushed the subprime mortgage crises.
Beyond my lack of concern for Penny Pritzker (I think she will be fine), I think there are many roles within the Democratic Party she can play without being a cabinet secretary. Are there no other candidates as schooled in the operations of Commerce? I think not.
No, this is a bad pick and reflects poorly on Obama if he indeed chooses her. The Chicago area victims of her subprime gambit would likely agree and deserve better.
November 20th, 2008 at 10:40 am
The US government has too many cabinet level departments with too much overlap. It’s not going to make much difference of Obama appoints Penny Pritzker or Penny Marshall or Henny Penny to Secretary of Commerce.
I can’t remember the last time Congress actually funded any of these each of these departments separately with a serious debate for each as they are required. If Congress can puke up omnibus bill after omnibus bill then they may as well combine the departments they are funding without debate because if it isn’t worth debating the merits of the funding separately, maybe the funding shouldn’t be separate.
November 20th, 2008 at 11:32 am
Last Post:
No, I do not support an end to subprime lending entirely. Im not sure where you read that.
Again, the pritzkers did not merely try to save Superior. They did so by extending subprime lending and, more importantly, by being at the “forefront” of the securitization of these loans.
Further, the large sum of money contributed was not a blind contribution of largess. It was part of a settlement to safeguard the family from official sanction,a s they were facing a messy lawsuit. Even if the money did help the FDIC, it did not cover the losses of many.
And again, are there no other candidates?
November 20th, 2008 at 11:52 am
While jeff continues concern trolling about the heinous pick by Obama for the pivotal Commerce Department (Quick: without Googling, who’s the current Commerce Secretary?), I’d like to focus more on
I think that if Napolitano gets the spot, it will be an excellent corrective to concerns about Pritzker. Aside from Jasper’s notes on how this has some sophisticated political sense to it, it’s also a case of finding someone extremely qualified for a crucial, demanding post, irrespective of simpleminded considerations about picking up another Senate seat. And if she accepts, she’ll be tackling a messy, frequently thankless job that won’t necessarily further her personal political ambitions. Which is a good pushback against “government is the problem” thinking.
(Okay, I’m primarily rooting for the pick because I want to see my wingnut father’s head explode. He lives in Arizona, and is a big fan of Napolitano and her border talk, so it would be hilarious if she were put in charge of the Border Patrol by the socialist Muslim who faked his birth certificate.)
November 20th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
mds,
Listen, you sniveling fuck. I am not much one for the internet crowd or its vacuous epithets.
That said, I was merely responding to people who posed oppositional questions to me. If that earns me some title from you or others, so be it. But the burden of proof is on you to warrant the label. Multiple people responded to my posts, invoking me by name. I was not seeking to derail the commentary or control it by any means. I was merely responding. So please do not try and suggest anything beyond that.
Best,
Jeff
November 20th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
joe from Lowell is dead right on this. With the economic downturn, getting her out of the governor’s mansion where she’d have to make spending cuts and tax hikes is the best for her longterm political career.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Sigh.
1) Obama seems to be trying to reward incompetence. The Arizona border is THE primary portal for illegal infiltration into the USA — because Governor Napolitano knee-capped state law enforcement’s protection of the border.
Putting her in as head of Homeland Security is almost as funny as those illegals sneaking through the backyard of DOD’s Intelligence School at Fort Huachaca.
2) Similarly, the Pritzers are known for PIONEERING subprime manipulations and for the trainwreck at Superior — see http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9404E5D6163FF932A25751C1A9679C8B63 and http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/671/
November 20th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
No, no, NO! Joe Lieberman for DHS Secretary! He knows a few things about homeland security and he needs to be gotten the hell out of the Senate. Besides, we need Janet! The Arizona legislature concocts all kinds of crazy shit, like making it legal to carry concealed firearms into schools.
Sorry, U.S.A. Janet would be excellent, but I’m not inclined to take one for the team here.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
spending two years in the Obama cabinet will likely make her a weaker candidate in Arizona by identifying her with Washington and Obama instead of the governor’s mansion.
For someone with gubernatorial experience, a successful stint as Secretary of Homeland Security looks like a pretty good resume line for a presidential run in 2016, though.
November 20th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
a short stint at Homeland Security would probably be a nice resume builder for a Senate run by Napolitano in 2010…
No. Unseating John McCain would be a tall order, the work toward which would have to begin mid-2009 at the latest. DHS is important and troubled enough that there’s no way the President-elect would choose someone with plans to use it as a stepping stone to something else.
Trying to divine the tea leaves…I reckon there may have been some sort of arrangement in which a plum Cabinet job for Napolitano was the price of buying detente with McCain, who wanted her out of his path to re-election. Which is not to say Napolitano was just a pawn. She perhaps let it be known that she was prepared to run for an open Senate seat but would probably choose top-tier Cabinet over bruising fight against McCain. So at the end of the day, everyone pretty much gets what they want.
As for Pritzker, I find it hard to get exercised about a rich crony getting the Commerce job as patronage — it’s something of a bipartisan tradition. That said, I worked as a political appointee at the Commerce Department under Ron Brown and Mickey Kantor (neither a second-stringer), under whom the Department was a more influential player than before or since. So I hope Obama, like Clinton, would be willing to see Commerce as more than a seat to keep warm.
November 20th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Nepolitano buys peace with McCain (who is likely to vote democratic on some key issues), but more importantly it give her something “national” to do once her term is up. Going up against McCain was a possibility, but it would have been a hard fight just to take out someone who might end up working with you more than he works against you. The better read on this is that Obama is telling Kyl that he needs to start looking for a new job in 2012.
November 20th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
Re: Pritzker
Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose
November 20th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
The Arizona border is THE primary portal for illegal infiltration into the USA — because Governor Napolitano knee-capped state law enforcement’s protection of the border.
Don Williams: the border between the US and Mexico is a federal responsibility, and only action by the federal government will lead to a durable, acceptable solution to the country’s illegal immigration problem. I doubt Obama will make immigration policy his first priority, but because of its national security implications it will have to be dealt with eventually. It’s obvious we’re not going to wall-build or fine our way out of the problem, and that leaves making a comprehensive deal — one that legalizes enough of the problem to undermine the perverse economic incentives that create excessive illegal immigration — the only way out. A former border state governor with a reputation for understanding the issue is exactly the type of person — both from a political and a policy expertise standpoint — the new president will want when it comes time to rally public opinion and lobby congress to get legislation enacted. She’s a far better choice than Richardson, by the way, as the racist right would find it easy to pillory the latter as a deep implant agent of the Mexican government.
My admiration for Barrack Obama’s political skills grows by the day. He’s playing chess while most other public officials are strictly checkers.
November 20th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
As a long-time AZ resident (nearly 30-year refugee from the Rust Belt) and proud American citizen, I am of two minds about Janet for Heimat Security Secretary.
This Department is a monster, but, since somebody must, I believe she’s an excellent choice to head it up.
That being said, she will be replaced as governor by rightwing loonytunes (redundant, I know) Jan Brewer. No, seriously, that woman is a real wackjob.
In addition, the state legislature became even more Republican on Nov. 4th, with a number of new legislators who are even further to the right than previous occupants (due to successful primary challenges to Republican “moderates”). Without Janet, AZ’s state government will thus be significantly to the right of the population. We’re going in the wrong direction, and it will make bad times here even worse.
At least the weather’s nice (sunny and 75 on Turkey Day — we’ll be eating in our shirtsleeves on the patio as usual this year).
November 20th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Fear Itself,
Probably what Tom Ridge was thinking too and 2008. He just forgot about the successfull part:-)
November 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Jeff:
Beyond the clear friendly packback this signals, Ms. Pritzker’s only accomplishment -beyond boundling tons of cash for Obama – is her inherited wealth.
She backed Obama before he won Iowa. To me that’s an accomplishment. I suspect you were underwhelmed by Obama’s primary campaign performance.
Thanks in part to Penny, he aren’t complaining about McCain’s cabinet picks or Hillary’s cabinet picks, and are instead complaining about Obama’s picks.
Again to the ultras on left, we’ll see how these four years play out, but I will comparing it to an imaginary Hillary or McCain administration as a baselline.
November 20th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
if Napolitano’s years of failing to secure the Mexico-AZ border are any indication, then she’s on track to do a horrendous job securing the whole country
November 21st, 2008 at 11:41 am
Yeah, well, stop electing far-right nutjobs to elective office while passing homo-hating amendments, and perhaps you’ll deserve a better government.
Sorry; I know it’s rough, especially in Tucson and Phoenix, to watch 12th-century fuckwits turn everything to shit, but until you find a way to make the ballot box reflect more progressive attitudes, we’re going to have to whisk Governor Napolitano away before she takes the fall for the real estate bubble. Seriously, have you considered why the Lt. Gov. is a far-right whackjob? Speaking as someone who vaguely remembers the days of Bruce Babbitt and Mo Udall, I’ve been horrified at the changing face of the Arizona electorate. So dismissiveness aside, how do we keep some of these red states from sliding into the Dark Ages?
And movie fan, could you at least scan the other comments before trolling about the “failure” of a governor to adequately run the US Border Patrol?
November 21st, 2008 at 1:09 pm
mds,
You replied to me:
I couldn’t agree more.
Primarily due to McCain’s coattails (IMHO) AZ voted somewhat more Repub than Democratic this election overall, but there was a small silver lining in Democrat Kirkpatrick picking up indicted Repub Renzi’s 1st District U.S. House seat. We now have 5 of 8 Congressional seats as Democratic. Coming into 2006 we had 3 of 8.
Unfortunately, the Democratic Party organization in AZ is relatively weak (and always has been), particularly compared to the electorate. The demographics look good for AZ moving toward a more progressive population, but I think actual voting will lag behind that for some time.
I’m hopeful that Democratic Attorney General Terry Goddard will win the governership in ‘10, and Janet can come back to beat Kyl for Senator in ‘12. In the meantime, the Repubs should get a whopping share (rightfully so) of the blame for how bad things are.
As for “homo-hating amendments”, you’ll notice that blue, progressive California did the same thing. That’s a change that will take a generation, I’m afraid.
March 11th, 2009 at 5:19 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:36 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
April 2nd, 2009 at 5:50 am
I bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!
buy cheap viagra
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:29 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 9:42 am
I want to say – thank you for this!
viagra