hillary's options

It had sort of been my assumption that rather than take a place in Obama's cabinet Hillary would prefer to build her own power base in the Senate. But seniority, in the upper house, is linked to how long you've been in the queue and Hillary has only been there eight years, a mere blink of an eyelid for many of the ancient creatures that roam its marbled halls. As this NYT report makes clear, her routes to real power in that institution are blocked off:

She had approached the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid, about becoming chairwoman of a special subcommittee to handle health care issues, but he squelched the idea, Senate officials said. Aides to Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, made it clear that despite his illness, he intended to consider health overhaul before the full committee that he leads.

Mrs. Clinton was also discouraged from trying to mount a challenge to any junior members of the party’s Senate leadership, one official said. In a seniority-driven institution like the Senate, it could take years for Mrs. Clinton to accumulate real power despite her status as a national political celebrity and the appeal she demonstrated in the primary season.

So the prospect of having a high-status role that gives her something to do (and to her credit, Hillary is very much a doer rather than - as in the case of many of her colleagues - a pontificator) must be appealing. Note, further down in that NYT report, a quote from her close friend and adviser Terry McAuliffe to the effect that it would be a great job for her.

The one thing I don't quite get is, what happens if Obama fires her after four years? She'll be a mere civilian again.

We'll find out what she thinks soon enough. I get the strong impression from the reports that Obama has offered it to her. I don't think he'd risk leaving the impression that he'd flirted with the idea only to humiliate her. I think it's Hillary's for the taking.

Comments

[koreyel]

Regarding this:

The one thing I don't quite get is, what happens if Obama fires her after four years? She'll be a mere civilian again.

Suppose he fires her and rehires her?
In other words: Makes her VP in 2012.

Do not think for an instant Barack does not understand the need to groom someone for 2016. It won't be Biden. Being Veep for 8 years and then jumping up to the Presidency is a tough leap. Gore couldn't get do it. Nor could Nixon.

People like change every so often. Being Veep for only four years is an easier leap. The population is not overly bored with you. You don't have to war as much with the "change" cycle.

Barack is shrewd enough to realize all this.
I think we will have our first woman president in 2016.
And it won't be the Alaskan airhead...

[Lyle]

Well, I see koreyel's point and it's thought-provoking, but what if Biden serves well and honorably for four years (as most of us quite expect him to do)? Wouldn't it be unsporting for Obama just to put him to pasture?

Regarding Al Gore: He won more popular votes than Dubya and was about to become 43 until Florida pulled a fast one, eventually prompting the Supreme Court to intervene and call off the bogus recount at a politically opportune moment for Bush. Republican abuses of power were rampant (like, gee, what a coincidence that Dubya's brother happened to be governor of the state that called an emergency recount!). So Gore's story doesn't fit the "eight years as Veep makes tough leap to Prez" narrative. "Republican chicanery stole an election", more like.