BREAKING: Judd Gregg Withdraws

by: David Sirota

Thu Feb 12, 2009 at 16:19


CNN is reporting that Judd Gregg just withdrew his nomination for Commerce Secretary. That's huge news - and hugely good news. As reported here at OpenLeft, Gregg wants to slash Social Security and is an ardent free-market fundamentalist and would have had control over a large portion of the government's economic enforcement apparatus. He was under the shadow of the Abramoff investigation, and he and the far-right were demanding near-unilateral control over the Census, which will be crucial for the 2010 redistricting battle.

Again, this is fantastic news. Now, can we please get someone at least moderately progressive as a Commerce Secretary nominee?

Update (Chris): President Obama's statement is pretty great:

For Immediate Release February 12, 2009

STATEMENT FROM PRESS SECRETARY
ROBERT GIBBS

"Senator Gregg reached out to the President and offered his name for Secretary of Commerce. He was very clear throughout the interviewing process that despite past disagreements about policies, he would support, embrace, and move forward with the President's agenda. Once it became clear after his nomination that Senator Gregg was not going to be supporting some of President Obama's key economic priorities, it became necessary for Senator Gregg and the Obama administration to part ways. We regret that he has had a change of heart."

Since Gregg will not run for re-election, this works out very well.

Update 2 (Chris): The timing of Gregg's withdrawal indicates it is part of the broader Republican attempts to oppose President Obama and the Democratic trifecta at all costs. TPM quotes a Democratic congressional staffer:

It's hard not to think that Gregg's withdrawal, with the grumbling about the census and the stimulus, was not timed to cause the most damage possible to the Obama administration. Releasing the statement just as Obama took the stage in Peoria was clearly designed to undermine the President's event. The fact he scheduled a presser only seems to confirm it. The classy exit would have been to wait til tomorrow afternoon to quietly bow out. Basically Gregg decided not just to politely decline, but rather to blow shit up and burn the bridge behind him. Do not think this portends good things for the wider political climate.

If the larger GOP strategy can be describe as putting all of their chips on "FAIL", this has to be seen as a significant addition to that pile, no?

Sounds exactly right.
David Sirota :: BREAKING: Judd Gregg Withdraws

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
BREAKING: Judd Gregg Withdraws | 66 comments
You just made my day David (4.00 / 2)
I needed SOME good news today to dampen all the other nonsense.
Wow (0.00 / 0)

Not all good news (0.00 / 0)
It also means that we are much less likely to be able to win that vote in the Senate, and it will be much more difficult to take the seat in 2010.  
You are right (4.00 / 2)
about the increased difficulty on winning the seat. What a stupid, execrable deplorable choice Gregg was (one of the 3 Gees: Geithner, Gates and Gregg who would be comfortaqble choices in a Bush-Cheney cabinet. Bipartisanship carried to the  extent of absurdity and nauseum.)
[ Parent ]
Who cares... (4.00 / 1)
If the Democrats succeed we will pick up senate seats elsewhere (though even Gregg might be at risk or just retire if the economy comes round) and if we fail, we wouldn't likely pick up this seat whether it was Gregg or the Republican chosen to replace him. The more I thought about it the more I realized there was absolutely no reason to put Gregg in the cabinet.

Ultimately, his silly shenanigans both in demands for a Republican replacement and in sitting out the stimulus vote are enough to please me that he will sit on the sidelines as part of the minority for the next two years.  

[ Parent ]
Please see this quickhit... (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Gregg's not running in 2010 (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Census (4.00 / 6)
he was demanding near-unilateral control over the Census

Last I heard, Obama took this control completely away from him.  I hadn't heard he was fighting to take it back.  Just guessing, but I suspect that is why he withdrew his name.

According to TPM (4.00 / 3)
Gregg was getting a LOT of criticism from the New Hampshire GOP over this decision. He just didn't want to have his feelings hurt any more.

Once again, Obama reaches his hand out and the GOP slaps it away.

[ Parent ]
They needed to do that much more quietly. (0.00 / 0)
When I heard that they had stripped the Census out from under Gregg, I was like "Wow, that's really embarrassing, Gregg is willing to just accept that?"  I guess he wasn't.

There ought to have been a more subtle way to do that than just have the director of the Census Bureau report directly to the President.  Cutting the Sec'y out of the chain of command in his own department would be a bridge too far for most people, I think.

...  Well, if we couldn't control the Census than I guess this is the best outcome.  The census determines, among other things, the next round of EV allocation, as well as redistricting numbers within the several states.  Undercounting Democratic constituencies nationwide is a pretty serious negative.  Though the Newman-Hodes two-step would have been really helpful on legislative matters in this congress and the next.  

Too bad Gregg wasn't more of a pushover.  He was a hardass throughout this whole process, up to and including just withdrawing instead of negotiating a compromise on the Census matter.

Unfortunately, now his stature as an opponent is increased, because he's been validated by Obama.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, that's the downside of "bipartisanship" (0.00 / 0)
that never seems to get noticed or mentioned: while it may be that appearing bipartisan raises one's own standing in the eyes of the public, the flip side is that it also confers legitimacy on one's opponents, and their point of view, however insane.
[ Parent ]
Census (0.00 / 0)
I wonder if that is the real reason he took the job, get some GOP say over the Census. Once he lost that their was no reason to take the job.
[ Parent ]
David Sirota (0.00 / 0)
this dude is so lost, Um the Free Market is good as long as we have some oversight, which we have not had in the past 8 years.

Probably you are referring to the NotSoFree market (4.00 / 1)
or the Nearly Free Market or as the Republicans like to call it Socialism.
[ Parent ]
Um, reading skills? (4.00 / 1)
"ardent free market fundamentalist", which is what we have had in the past 8 years
[ Parent ]
Just some oversight would help, SEC needs to be gutted as well (0.00 / 0)
nothing wrong with the free market though
[ Parent ]
Nothing wrong (4.00 / 5)
with the tooth fairy either. But since both are imaginary, neither are particularly relevant to discussions of the real world.

Who are the best keepers of the people's liberties? The people themselves. The sacred trust can be no where so safe as in the hands most interested in preserving it.
James Madison
[ Parent ]
pissy mood around here today. (0.00 / 0)
Free Market is the best. Like I said, SEC needs to be gutted and upgraded and short selling needs to be an enforceable law.  
[ Parent ]
Or "The Laissez Fairy Tale" (4.00 / 4)


Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
Oh my god (4.00 / 4)
You can't be serious.... You blather this crap and you think anybody will ever believe anything you say??

The tooth fairy is real, dude.

Blogs, on the other hand, are imaginary - you really think anyone reads your idiocy? It's all just a really complicated bot designed to make you think you have readers, commenters, haters, and trolls.

But the tooth fairy is NOT a bot.

I know it, because I voted for her.

[ Parent ]
I was commenting (0.00 / 0)
about your misreading of what David actually said. And now you've misread me.
[ Parent ]
Um (4.00 / 1)
he said 'free market fundamentalist' and you pretend he said he hates free markets. Such a Republicanish little ploy (see "obama wants to teach sex to first-graders" during the campaign". Free-market fundamentalists don't want regulation and oversight, so what are you arguing about, exactly?
[ Parent ]
What the hell are you even talking about? (4.00 / 4)
Be more coherent.  
[ Parent ]
Free Market is a term to demonize... (0.00 / 0)
Free Market is a dirty word.  What it sounds like you might be describing is a Fair Market.  
[ Parent ]
This is crazy and great! (0.00 / 0)
though I almost think that Gregg did this on purpose to get bipartisan cred for 2010, no? (read the electoral analysis on Campaign Diaries)
Won't work (0.00 / 0)
If he gave up on it after a week, it's obvious he's not of bipartisan character.

Conduct your own interview of Sarah Palin!
[ Parent ]
too bad he didn't resign first (4.00 / 2)

Maybe (4.00 / 1)
the real question is, will Obama ever actually have a Commerce Secretary? LOL.
wonderful news (4.00 / 1)
MSNBC is saying the White House staff seems surprised.


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
Pritzker, Richardson, Gregg, ... (0.00 / 0)
what makes anyone think a progressive will ever be chosen?

None of those 3 were -- and you could say that Obama's choices have been getting more and more conservative with each new pick.

I hope somebody's briefing against him (0.00 / 0)
I don't know why he's withdrawing, but if they can spread the rumour that they found something ugly that would make him unconfirmable or that he was trying to torpedo the stimulus, it'd be helpful for 2010.

If he appears vacillating or malignant, that's a big asset. The Obama administration needs to be very 'disappointed' in him.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

Notice (0.00 / 0)
that Gregg made a point in his statement to explicitly mention that there was nothing that arose in the course of the vetting process to cause his withdrawal.
[ Parent ]
He would say that, wouldn't he? (4.00 / 1)
Now that he's not running for re-election, there's actually no need or benefit (well, aside from cheering up those amongst us who value spite as a political weapon) to attacking him.

But if he were running, I'd run with that rumour anyway. Who are you going to believe?

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
Not running (4.00 / 2)
He isn't running for re-election in 2010.  This really is the best of both worlds.
[ Parent ]
Well, potentially huge and good. (4.00 / 1)
Depends on whether Obama "reaches out" again to yet another hard-right ideolog. If he learns his lesson and hires somebody who agrees with Obama's goals, it's good news indeed. Even Gregg agrees on that, according to a CNN update:

citing "irresolvable conflicts" over the administration's stimulus bill and the upcoming 2010 census.

"We are functioning from a different set of views on many critical items of policy," Gregg said in a statement announcing the decision. "Obviously, the president requires a team that is fully supportive of all his initiatives."

The downside, of course, is that this will be spun as yet another Obama setback and a failure to properly vet his nominees. Unfortunately there will be some truth in the latter.

John Harwood just announced Gregg's (4.00 / 4)
withdrawal as a severe blow to Obama.  'Gregg had credibility on cutting entitlements but he couldn't work with the Obama people'.   He's comparing Gregg to Jim Jeffords rejecting Bush and becomming an independent. Excuse me, but Jeffords was right and Gregg is an adherent to a failed ideology.

I'm throwing up a little in my mouth.

He was a wrong choice--why did anyone think he could fit in?

And now, MSNBC is spinning this a an Obama loss and of course it is "now the news of the day".

dog chasing tail.  back to questioning whether Obama is really bi-partisan enough.

I'm sooooo disgusted.

Anyone know whether Caterpillar has made nice with the UAW?

I live in a true blue state--I will have a choice in November

who cares (4.00 / 2)
No one will remember or care by next week.  The press will get excited for two days.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
Jim Jeffords (4.00 / 1)
The spin now won't matter, just as when we got Jeffords it didn't help us in the next election
[ Parent ]
What corporatist scum will take his place? (0.00 / 1)
probably some illinois buddy like John Shimkus.
I hear Blago is available (0.00 / 0)
Poor snark, but I couldn't resist.
[ Parent ]
Bi-partisan (4.00 / 8)
The funny thing is that if Obama had not made such a show of reaching out to the GOP or placed bipartisanship as a primary objective, he might have gotten a handful of GOP votes on the stimulus.

Instead, its clear the Republican strategy is to reject everything Obama does wholesale as a way to set him up as a failure on one of his key initiatives. They know the media is all too willing to play along. The story is "Obama's failed bipartisanship" not "Republicans reject Obama's generous overtures"  

Handful (4.00 / 7)
Obama did get a handful of Republican votes on the stimulus.

Perhaps he could have gotten more, though.  I agree with that.  But I prefer this.  Obama looks like the good guy and Republicans look like Limbaugh-obstructionists.  Sure, the talking heads on TV say it the other way, but that isn't what the voters see.

[ Parent ]
Senate, yes (4.00 / 1)
I debated my wording of this because he did get a handful in the Senate, only after making serious concessions. I think he could have picked up maybe 8-10 votes in the House if he just said "Here's my bill to save the economy. I have the votes I need."
[ Parent ]
3 Votes (4.00 / 1)
Five votes is a handful.  With all the concessions Repoblicans delivered 0 votes in the House and 3 in the Senate.  That is two short of a handful.
[ Parent ]
If you count the pinky and thumb, sure.... (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Nominate Lawrence Lessig! (4.00 / 5)
hey, its an idea. Open commerce@!
contenders (0.00 / 0)
Who were the other contenders for the Commerce secretary when Gregg was  being considered? Wasn't Snowe or the other Senator from Maine being considered? Unlikely they'd go for it now considering that wield so much power in the senate.
That would be fine as long as they don't make any deals... (0.00 / 0)
Like they did with Gregg... If Obama nominates Snowe or Collins, no deals... The Gov appoints who they want.

This was a bad pick from the start, made even worse by the backroom deals that were put in place to ensure that the seat stayed in R hands.

[ Parent ]
Gregg praises Obama (0.00 / 0)
Basically says he couldn't be 100% on the team.  Will be "more effective for this President in the Senate."  Pretty positive I would say.



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

"Will I run? Probably not" (0.00 / 0)
Also says census was minor issue.  

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
TPM: Dem. Hill Staffer says timed for maximum damage (4.00 / 1)
Yes, This Was A Kamikaze Attack (0.00 / 0)
on the Administration.  I wonder if perhaps Judd Gregg is unwell in the head?
He's a Republican senator (4.00 / 1)
How well in the head can he be?
[ Parent ]
Suggestion We push for a nominee! (4.00 / 3)
Let's push for someone we know is Pro Business but also very pro national interest, U.S. workers too.

It is possible and these people exist.  

You can make butt loads of money, be a capitalist extraordinaire yet be in the national interest and U.S. workers interests.  Hell look at China, India, China is kicking the U.S. ass frankly.  

Who should the blogosphere promote?  I have a lot of people like Ralph Gomory, even Alan Blinder but they are not business people, they are theorists.  Warren Buffet?

Steve Jobs I think is ill but someone who promotes US industry, who has some concept of corporate citizenship as well as plain making butt loads of money.  

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

Question (0.00 / 0)
Where does Bill Gates fall into this thinking?  I'm used to villainizing him due to the monopoly trials and because I'm a Mac guy, but his actual politics outside of Microsoft seem reasonable.  Of all the big names, he's the one actually retired (more or less).
[ Parent ]
evil, evil, evil (4.00 / 1)
Evil Business practices, horrific on labor and basically generating a monopoly, stole from other companies, people...

think about it in terms of innovation here..

where's the real innovation?  It's in the chips and frankly over in Linux and OS X.  That's open source and Apple.

They have acquired....and then destroyed so many startups and technologies.  

Basically Gates made the right business deals at the right time along with some very predatory business practices so ...
that's not my idea of a good business man at all.

Frankly the CEO of Google (who also labor arbitrages) would be much better in terms of tech CEOs.  

But you need someone who is well rounded, who knows all sectors of business, not just tech.  

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

[ Parent ]
oops duplicate sry (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
evil, evil, evil (0.00 / 0)
Evil Business practices, horrific on labor and basically generating a monopoly, stole from other companies, people...

think about it in terms of innovation here..

where's the real innovation?  It's in the chips and frankly over in Linux and OS X.  That's open source and Apple.

They have acquired....and then destroyed so many startups and technologies.  

Basically Gates made the right business deals at the right time along with some very predatory business practices so ...
that's not my idea of a good business man at all.

Frankly the CEO of Google (who also labor arbitrages) would be much better in terms of tech CEOs.  

But you need someone who is well rounded, who knows all sectors of business, not just tech.  

NoSlaves.com  


The Economic Populist

[ Parent ]
Warren Buffett? George Soros? (4.00 / 4)
Floating the names would at least be worth it to see the Republicans frothing.
[ Parent ]
Am I the only one (4.00 / 7)
who sees an opportunity in this to dispense once and for all with Republican complaints about "bipartisanship"? I hope the Obama administration spins this along with the slap in the face on the stimulus to squarely place the blame for partisanship in the Republican camp. Come on - Obama went out of his way to nominate somebody he knew the Dem base would hate, basically a mainstream Republican, all in the name of bipartisanship - and the Republicans decide in the end that their better choice is to obstruct and oppose the President instead.

They've got to spin this into a persistent theme of Republican obstructionism, ramp up the pressure on the "centrist" Republicans to redeem their brand by voting more and more with Dems, and solidify the marginalization of mainstream Conservatism in the public and media's mind.

Of course, the media may be so committed to the fairy tale version of divided government that no amount of quality spin will get them to give it up. But I think Obama ought to schedule a prime-time speech on bipartisanship, why he values it, what he's done so far to try to promote it, and every point at which Republicans have chosen obstruction instead. Risky perhaps - but if anybody could pull that speech off, Obama could.

How about a former Republican? (4.00 / 1)
Jim Jeffords? Or almost as good - Lincoln Chaffee.

I agree - if Obama wants to stick with the bipartisan thing, he should go out there and define it while talking directly to the people, rather than leave it up to Chuck Todd.

Who are the best keepers of the people's liberties? The people themselves. The sacred trust can be no where so safe as in the hands most interested in preserving it.
James Madison

[ Parent ]
The only way that speech would work for me (4.00 / 1)
is if it ended with something like "Tried it, they don't want it, it's over."
[ Parent ]
Yup (4.00 / 4)
Should be the death knell.

If Obama is smart about this, he can say to the Versailles sycophants:

"I tried it. They didn't want it. They played games with the future of our country. We're moving forward."

And make the Repubs own this.

[ Parent ]
Reich? (4.00 / 9)
How's this for an obvious, yet out-of-the-box choice: Robert Reich.
Love to see him on the team (4.00 / 1)
Obama's econ team has way too narrow a focus.
[ Parent ]
Good riddance (4.00 / 2)
Gregg was an incredibly bad pick for the cabinet anyway.  Come on, choosing a guy who wanted to abolish the Dept. of Commerce to head the Dept. of Commerce?

Gregg makes himself look really bad by doing this the way he did it.  It harms him much more than it harms Obama.  He's a fool to think his kamikaze act, if that's what it was, would have any great effect.  What a fool he was to do this press conference.  

I think the Obama administration should move on, not make a big deal out of this, and choose someone else.  It would be a mistake to do anything more than the press statement.  Don't inflate Gregg's over-sized ego.

That being said, I am very curious about what really happened.  Maybe he had a meeting with Larry Summers and Rahm Emmanuel.  :)

BREAKING: Judd Gregg Withdraws | 66 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox