(And why not? Who else, other than say Jim Splaine, shares with Judd as much passion about our first-in-the-nation status? - promoted by Dean Barker)
There's been a lot of speculation about who Governor Lynch might pick to fill Judd Gregg's seat, in the event that Gregg is picked to become Obama's Commerce Secretary. A name I haven't heard but that I think deserves more attention is Secretary of State Bill Gardner. He would fit a lot of very important criteria for the role.
First, he's popular around the state and not viewed as overly partisan. He's been supported by Democrats and Republicans alike to hold his current position, and as foremost defender of the New Hampshire Primary, he's got strong credibility as someone who will do what's right for New Hampshire. |
| Second, he doesn't have a political apparatus of his own and would be unlikely to run for re-election in 2010. His is an appointed post, not a popularly elected one, and he hasn't had to run for election in over twenty years. He would be unlikely to be able to assemble enough supporters and money in two years to run a statewide campaign - if he even wanted to. This leaves the field wide open for Hodes, Shea-Porter, Swett, Marchand, and anyone else to jump in and make their case to the voters of New Hampshire as to why they should be the next Senator, without having to oppose an ongoing incumbent.
Third, this would be viewed as a culmination of a long and distinguished career in state service, not a retirement - he could be re-appointed to be SoS in two years very easily, if he wanted to. This would be most important on his own retirement, though - a US Senator draws a much better retirement package than an NH official, and Secretary Gardner is at an age when that might begin to be a consideration and a reason why he might be willing to put up with Washington for a few years.
Fourth, picking Gardner means that Governor Lynch doesn't leave anyone unhappy. Judd Gregg might approve of Gardner as a demonstratedly nonpartisan pick, all the prospective Senate candidates would be satisfied that he wouldn't be in their way in two years, the NHGOP can hardly complain about him after soundly supporting his work for decades (at least, they can't complain until he starts voting), and he is a Democrat so the Democrats would hardly be disappointed either.
Fifth, the presidential primary dates won't be set in 2010; even if Gardner were to decide to retire for good, there would be plenty of time for a new SoS to prepare to defend the NH primary in 2012. Gardner would also still be available for help in that regard as needed, advising the new SoS (if he didn't resume the office himself).
Sixth, he's quietly very well-connected in the state. He knows enough people that lots of the important players in the state would feel they had a connection to him as Senator, and be therefore less opposed to him and better able to communicate their wants and needs to him.
Anyhow, those are my thoughts on the situation. Other reasons why or why not Gardner? |
