|
Edited on Mon Jun-22-09 08:38 AM by karynnj
The corruption issues as you say are real and they are compounded by the fact that he chairs the Banking committee. So, he could lose either in a primary or the general election.
For Dodd,this happens when he really is at his pinnacle of his power, having an a real choice of major committees he could chair. He has to be one of the dozen most powerful Senators. He now chairs the Banking committee, but he could likely gain the HELP chair and has the seniority that he could take the SFRC from John Kerry in the next Congress. In HELP, he is working on all the issues he has fought for over a long career with a large Democratic majority and a Democratic President. Without those sweetheart mortgages, his re-election would be almost a formality - instead of a question.
I understand the loyalty that Kennedy (and Kerry) have shown in defending his Senate work, but there is a real question of whether Dodd's transgressions are too big too ignore. This is one of the few cases, where I disagree with those good Senators, even though I agree with their comments on the good Dodd has done.
But, if friendships are ignored, what is the impact if Dodd loses? The first question is whether there is a (non-Dodd) Democrat who is favored to beat the most popular Republican. Does he/she have a better or worse chance than Dodd of winning the general election?
If either answer is yes, do Democrats gain the high ground, keeping their own integrity by admitting that a powerful, high ranking Democrat has crossed the line? Is there anything Dodd could do now to right the wrong? I would think that repaying the difference from "retail" rate now would be good, but it still doesn't answer if those goodies influenced his actions. If they did, that, not the savings to Dodd, is the real problem and that can't be undone. That has not been proven - if it didn't happpen, a strong case needs to be made that it didn't.
If both answers are "no" and it is thought Dodd could pull off a victory, is he bad enough that we need to risk the seat? In addition, will Dodd be there or not change the likelihood of rejecting Lieberman next time? The difference is major - if Dodd is there, CT will have one of the dozen most powerful Senators and either Lieberman or a freshman. If Dodd is defeated, losing Lieberman means losing almost all their seniority. In the long term, could defeating Dodd, save Lieberman, who is not plagued with corruption issues, but who when he leads is usually doing so against the Democrats.
If Dodd is not re-elected, from the HELP list, it looks like the next most senior is Harkin. I wonder if he would trade Agriculture for HELP - after that it is Mikulski. On Banking the next senior is Tim Johnson. If Dodd loses, Harkin is a progressive and I don't think Johnson has been tarnished, as Dodd has with mortgage ties. Kerry is doing an outstanding job, that I doubt Dodd could come close to matching, on SFRC.
I am almost glad that as a non- CT resident, I don't have to make these judgments.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
