NH-Sen: White House Confirms Gregg Speculation

NYT:

The White House on Saturday confirmed the widespread speculation that President Obama is set to pick Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, as his nominee for commerce secretary.

“Senator Gregg is now the leading candidate for commerce and a pick that could come as early as Monday,” a senior administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because a formal announcement has not yet been made.

If Gov. Lynch appoints a GOPer caretaker who won’t run in 2010, then I can live with this. Gregg must really want out of the Senate, huh.

UPDATE: I’ve heard some speculation that Lynch could pick former state Rep. Elizabeth Hager. Hager, a moderate (perhaps even liberal) pro-choice Republican, served thirteen terms in the NH state House until she was primaried out this past fall by a gang of four conservative candidates who campaigned against her together. She also endorsed Obama late in the game and Lynch (who went on to win 70-28). She’s also only 63.

More: Hager voted against a bill that would have prevented employers from subjecting employees to anti-union propaganda. One article says (not a direct quote from her) that Hager “would be delighted to stay for just two years.” Pretty vague paraphrase and doesn’t mean she’d commit to being a caretaker.

114 thoughts on “NH-Sen: White House Confirms Gregg Speculation”

  2. another dirty looking deal. the nh guv will appoint some gop lite dude to the seat so not to tip the sneate scales. liberals will be enraged by this deal.

  3. What kind of commerce secretary would Gregg make?  Obviously, Obama will be making the most important and final decisions, but undoubtedly Gregg will have some impact on how the country is governed.

    Also, am I the only one who is skeptical that Obama would select Gregg primarily because of the opportunity for a senate pick up?  I’m presuming Obama gets along well with Gregg and values his advice and opinions on economic matters.  Perhaps it’s also an effort to bring more traditional fiscal conservatives on board as well.

    I know this site is primarily dedicated to horse race issues, but sometimes it’s striking how little we discuss sustantive issues.

  4. Pros:

    1. Get moderate/liberal Republican who is at least somewhat more likely to vote with Obama than Gregg.  

    2. More importantly, get an open seat in a blue state that we probably become the favorite to win.  

    Cons:

    We get a conservative Republican running the Commerce Department.  I don’t know how much damage that Gregg can do here, but I’m sure that we lose something in comparison to a Democrat.

    So the question is whether the pros outweigh the cons.  My feeling right now is yes, although it would depend on three factors, how supportive the replacement is of Obama’s agenda, whether we win NH in 2010, and how much of a troublemaker Judd Gregg is at Commerce.

  6. Gregg can do much harm at Commerce under a President Obama. Theoretically he could fiddle with the census and maybe do bad things with regard to climate through NOAA, but not much more than that. Am I overlooking something? Seems like Commerce is just a lot of empty boosterism for big American companies. Truth be told, they should probably reorganize it out of existence. This is an excellent move by Obama, imho.

  8. Gregg is probably the worst senator out there in terms of being more conservative than the state population.  He’s a solid conservative in a blue state.  I can’t think of anywhere else where we are worse off by this metric.  Maybe Vitter just by virtue of him being so incredibly conservative lately?

  9. I don’t know how much say Gregg would have on any future free trade agreements, but we know he would probably prefer the Congress never look at them before they are signed.  We would have seen the same views on trade generally if Richardson were the pick.  Ron Kirk is also a free trader so I think all the hysteria going on in the media and some corners of Congress about Obama being protectionist are greatly exaggerated.  

    I tend to be a bit of a protectionist or a fair trader myself, but I realize that I am on the losing end of the stick until the Sherrod Browns and Byron Dorgans come up with more specific proposals and legislation.  

  10. Is Rudman really younger than Lautenberg?  I wouldn’t feel safe with him there.  He could then have the seat for a long time.

    And the most enraged liberal on this subject before (if you don’t mind me picking on you, David) was DavidNYC.  Who is now OK with it.  So, please do it on Monday.

    And Congressman Hodes, start your engine!

    I think this would surpass Carnahan in MO as our #1 pickup opportunity.

  11. Liz Hager is appointed.

    But I can see why someone would want to work with the United Way over the United States Senate

  13. Beacuse honestly, beyond them not running in 2010 (unless it’s CSP or Hodes) and their vote on EFCA I could care less about them.

  14. My view is that a durable leader, while not being vindictive rewards loyalty and punishes faithlessness.

    It seems a good number of elected officials and aspiring Dems who at great risk to their careers, stuck their necks out for him in 2007 & early 2008 while HRC was still favored ended up with nothing! I can understand endorsements from other IL folks but do you really think Tim Kaine wanted to be DNC Chair when he was the first governor to endorse Obama? Jim Cooper, John Kerry, Sam Nunn, Jim Doyle, Rosa DeLauro (her political network helped hand Obama his first NE win in the CT primary), Tony Lake, David Wilhelm, Robert Reich etc. I don’t expect pay for play and I know Napolitano, Greg Craig etc got jobs but what ever happened to those “300 foreign policy advisors” who were with Obama while HRC was still in it. I strongly doubt a lot of them are in HRC’s state department.

    Anyway, it’s still early and I don’t expect many of the first year appointees to remain in office beyond the first term so these guys may end up getting some profile, but the whole thing just seems so glaringly indifferent.  

  15. that wouldn’t involve a young and politically viable Republican.  Of course, the whole thing is ridiculous, if Obama picked Evan Bayh for a cabinet seat do you think for one second Mitch Daniels would even hesitate about choosing a hardcore Republican?  Just the same, the certainty of picking up this seat in 2010 makes it worth it.  We already stand very strong chances of picking up open seats in Missouri, Ohio, and Florida, and beating Bunning (Kentucky), Burr (North Carolina), and Specter (Pennsylvania).  Sebelius might even run in Kansas and we could conceivably get a top-tier recruit in Louisiana to run against Vitter.  Even Texas may present an attractive target when Hutchison resigns to run for governor.

    The point is, we could very well reach a super-majority in the Senate in 2010.  Every seat is worth it.  Especially in blue states.  If we gain a Senate seat in New Hampshire the odds are we hold it for a long time.  With so many Blue Dog and DLC senators, we need to push our numbers into the upper 60s to ensure progressive legislation and the defeat of GOP filibusters.

    And if Gregg runs again in 2010 there is a very good chance he wins re-election.

  16. She strikes me as one of the sane, economically moderate, socially liberal Republicans that used to be abundant in this country before the corporate con-men and religious fanatics drove them out. In fact, were I represented by her, I would have supported her.

    Why, you ask? While I am a fairly progressive person by today’s standards, I admit I am far more like an ultra-liberal Chafee-style Republican. I support nearly all progressive social causes and hold a deep concern about our environment. I am not averse to increased domestic spending, so long as it actually makes a difference. Certain pork barrel and corporate welfare scams make me grimace (as I’m sure they do for others). I believe labor unions serve a valuable role in society: they stand up for the workers and act as a balance to the corporations. Thing is, I am not particularly close to any of the unions. In my hometown area of Youngstown, the labor unions became very corrupt. Additionally, the Democratic machine in my area is EXTREMELY corrupt, so I make sure I have as little to do with it as possible.  

  18. Well, while we’ve been talking about Hager, the Boston Globe is reporting that speculation is now turning to J. Bonnie Newman, another seemingly moderate Republican woman:

    http://www.boston.com/news/pol…

    A new name is circulating among New Hampshire politicians as a likely pick to replace US Senator Judd Gregg if he is appointed Commerce Secretary: J. Bonnie Newman, a Republican with close ties to both Gregg and the state’s Democratic governor, John Lynch, and extensive Washington experience.

    The White House has not announced a decision on the cabinet slot, and Democratic Governor John Lynch has revealed nothing about whom he might consider if Gregg gets the job. But Newman’s resume and Lynch’s appointment history make her seem like a logical possibility.

    Consider: Newman served as assistant secretary of Commerce for economic development in the Reagan administration. She was in charge of administrative operations for the George H.W. Bush White House.

    She was chief of staff to Gregg when he was a congressman in the 1980s, and she was one of the first Republicans to publicly endorse Lynch in his 2004 challenge of then-Republican Governor Craig Benson, and co-chaired Republicans for Lynch.

    She has held a number of high-profile positions in higher education, including several important posts at the University of New Hampshire (including interim president) and executive dean of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. She has also led the New Hampshire Business and Industry Association.

    That is just the kind of resume that Lynch, who emphasizes competence and experience in his appointments, would likely favor. But would a Democratic governor really appoint a Republican, especially when Gregg’s departure opens the possibility of Democrats gaining a 60-vote supermajority in the Senate?

    This one might. Lynch casts himself as a bipartisan politician. He appointed Republicans as his attorney general and commissioner of Environmental Services, and he endorsed a GOP state senator over a Democratic challenger (and longtime state representative) last year.

    He stayed out of the presidential primary (he did take the stage with John McCain when he appeared in Hopkinton, Lynch’s hometown) and he played a low-profile role in the presidential general election, even though New Hampshire was a closely fought battleground state.

    If he picked Newman, Lynch would certainly irritate New Hampshire Democrats. But they might be more inclined to forgive him if Newman promises not to run in 2010, when Gregg’s term is up — which would still put them ahead of where they are now, with a relatively popular incumbent Republican in the Senate seat.

    1. only Landrieu, Feingold, and MAYBE Dorgan are really to the left of their states. I think the rest fit their states pretty well–often to my frustration.  

  20. I don’t know if anyone is still reading this thread, but today cnn reported that Mitch McConnell is saying Gregg won’t take the deal if Lynch would appoint a Dem.

    U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg won’t take the job of commerce secretary in the Obama administration if his appointment would tip the Senate balance of power in favor of Democrats, the chamber’s Republican leader said Sunday.

    Sen. Judd Gregg is the leading candidate for commerce secretary, an Obama administration official said.

    Sen. Judd Gregg is the leading candidate for commerce secretary, an Obama administration official said.

    “He’s indicated to me that he would not accept this appointment if he believed it would lead to a change in the current makeup of the Senate,” Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, told reporters.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI…

    Already widely speculated; this is just a confirmation.

Comments are closed.