Thus spake our Outraged friend early this morning. And Frank Phillips, who has written a couple of Globe pieces on the upcoming special election, seems to agree. Phillips reports that Representatives Ed Markey (MA-07) and Mike Capuano (MA-08) will not run if Joe Kennedy does, and he quotes consultant Dan Payne as saying that Joe’s “candidacy in a special election would force all other candidates – real or imagined – to think twice about whether they want to take on a Kennedy so close to Senator Kennedy’s death.” Meanwhile, the headlines breathlessly declare that “potential rivals await word from Joseph Kennedy.”
I’m just not sure what I think about all this. Yes, Joe served creditably as a congressman back in the late 1980s and 1990s. Sure, his work at Citizens Energy has been good (though not uncontroversial). And, of course, his last name is Kennedy.
But how much does any of that count for now? Joe has been largely out of the public eye for over a decade, hitting the national press mostly when his personal life or his dealings with Hugo Chavez made news. Many younger voters won’t know much about him, though they’ll recognize his last name. It’s not obvious to me exactly who constitutes his “base” — the voters and activists to whom he can turn to energize a sprint to the December 8 primary.
And, frankly, comments like this make me uncomfortable.
Kennedy is being urged to run by some relatives who would like to keep the seat in the family….
“Keep the seat in the family.” Good grief. I know, I know, it happens all the time. But it should deeply worry anyone who values small “d” democratic principles.
I was born in Massachusetts, and I have lived most of my life here. And on every day that I have been alive, until last Wednesday, Ted Kennedy was a Senator from this state. Every chance I had, I voted for him. But Joe doesn’t get my vote just because he’s Ted’s nephew. I hope he doesn’t get too many other people’s for that reason either.
…Joe II is formidable for exactly that reason. Nothing wrong with elected dynasties since the voters will still get to choose.
I really don’t agree with this conventional wisdom. Joe Kennedy is not Ted Kennedy. Sure, they share the same name, and I am not naive enough to believe that that is meaningless. But the fact is that Ted was a legend while Joe was a mediocre congressman who quit in the middle of his term with no real accomplishments.
<
p>To be honest, it would bother me a great deal if Joe were handed this seat. He was handed Tip O’Neil’s seat in 1986, and did little with it, so I would not expect great things from him. I don’t think he should be bequeathed a U.S. Senate seat like it is a family heirloom.
<
p>Should Joe run, he would be the frontrunner from the get-go, no doubt about it. Plus, I don’t know if I believe that emotions would not play a big part, even in December. However, I think that he would be imminently beatable, particularly by Coakley, who is strongly popular right now. Joe is not Vicki, and I think that there a few more negatives on his candidacy.
<
p>Either way, it is my hope that if he does announce, the field does not completely clear for him. I hope that the ambitious reps and others who have long-coveted this seat decide to make a race of it and not cower in fear like congressmen are wont to do. It would be an enormous shame, a disgrace really, if the state is denied a robust contest. Yes, Ted Kennedy was basically handed the seat in 1962 and turned out alright (and more), but again: there is absolutely no evidence that Joe Kennedy would be anything close to another Ted Kennedy.
that 1962 Teddy would be a Ted Kennedy?
I like him partly because of the Venezuelan oil thing, which you hint at having qualms about. JK wasn’t reluctant to help Chavez poke W in the eye, so long as Mass citizens were getting help with their heating problems. If the WSJ didn’t like it, so much the better, to me. He’s more of a known quantity than the other names floating around, relatives aside.
There are many areas in Joe’s resume that open themselves up for careful but potentially devesting attack:
<
p>1) The “family seat”/royal legacy issues.
<
p>2) His record in Congress: 12 years on the House Banking Committee, which poorly regulated and provided far too little oversight in the 1990s. Primarily known for promoting extending credit to questionable buyers and other “affordable housing” initiatives that at least can be characterized as leading to the sub-prime mess.
<
p>3) The connections between Citizen’s Energy and the now even more discredited Hugo Chavez. Those commercials of him on Lake Maracaibo are ripe for an attack ad.
<
p>4) The Annulment: Joe married , had two kids and divorced 12 years later. Then he asks for an annulment, so he can marry his former staffer in a “real church”? It is denied, then granted by the Archdiocese, then overturned by the Vatican itself. Embarrassing even if there isn’t any corresponding infidelity to discuss.
<
p>5) The Accident: At age 21, Joe overturns a jeep injuring his brother and permanently his brother’s girlfriend. Joe is cited with reckless driving and his license is suspended. Too close to Chappaquiddick to be ignored if he runs for “Teddy’s” seat.
<
p>I’m convinced the media and the talking heads are behind the public here. Camelot still lives but the 1960s are ancient history to anyone under 40. It will be no cakewalk if Joe throws his hat in the ring.
… that if we took Ted Kennedy seriously then there’s a case to be made for electing someone who was close to him and is most likely to have absorbed and/or reflected his values. I don’t, personally, see that he would vote all that different from his uncle. I really do believe that Ted Kennedy was bringing the Commonwealth and the country, in steps small and large, into a world not yet complete: his vision continues, I think, to lie before us.
<
p>But the danger is, I think, the reinforcement of the ‘Kennedy seat’ and some vague notion of dynastic oblige. At some point the bad Kennedy genes are going to outweigh the good Kennedy genes and we’ll get a real stinker. Maybe not with Joe, or Ted Jr, but sometime. The longer we go with a ‘Kennedy seat’, the harder it will be to say no. For that reason, I won’t be voting for any Kennedy’s despite being inordinately pleased with and proud of Ted’s service and voting record.
<
p>I suppose the best option would be for Governor Patrick to appoint Joe Kennedy to the interim seat and for Joe to pledge not to run in the general. Time, then, to move on.
<
p>Also… I’ve been unable to determine from news reports what term the Special election would fill? It seems like it ought to be the remainder of the Senators term, which is up in 2012 (so in effect, this would be a two year term) Or would this be a complete 6 year term? I suspect it is the former, but can’t find confirmation… Anybody know for sure?
Link.
So, whomever it is that fills the seat will have to, pretty quickly, turnaround and start campaigning all over again…
Kennedy was re-elected in 2006, so the term expires in 2012. Two full years is short term for the Senate but plenty of time to run for re-election.
…that Joe have a long chat with Caroline Kennedy about the pitfalls of assuming a seat belongs to him.
<
p>I think Joe starts with an advantage due to his family, but I don’t see it as an unbeatable advantage. If he gaffes a couple times, and polls start showing him tied or trailing a strong Republican, all bets are off for the primary.
Joe has held elected office and even without the last name a former member of the House could be a credible candidate for Senate. Caroline never held office and frankly I think it showed a bit.
I’ve seen Joe Kennedy campaign hard for a seat he already held (as my Congressman) and knew he’d win. He may start with a name advantage — although this advantage is fading for voters of each successive generation, I’m hearing — but would win over voters on his other merits.
<
p>As others have pointed out downthread, he has an earthy, “real-guy” appeal as opposed to the mystique of royalty, and that wasn’t hurt by his work (and his appearance in commercials) for Citizen’s Energy.
<
p>His sabbatical from elected office allows him to avoid the label of ambitious, entitled career politician, in favor of appearing the ‘reluctant hero answering the people’s call’.
that was JFK’s, who turned it over to Tip O’Neill, and then to Joe. Now Michael Capuano sits there, so for Joe to suddenly go into Teddy’s seat is not that big a leap for him. Not that he would would be a good or bad Senator, but that he has experienced the dynamic before. As for the strong Republican, who might that be, Brown, Mitt’s fair haired boy and father of Ayla, or Kerry Healy (sp?), who ran two embarrassing races for the MA House, and one sad one for governor? Her only plus is a husband with $$$ millions to spend, and a spot as the bride to Mitt Romney’s groom on top of his gubernatorial wedding cake. Maybe Charlie Baker could run for both Governor and Senator. He could practice on Senator and warm up for the Governor’s race.
I don’t think it’s Joe’s for the taking, but I do think he’d be formidable. To repeat myself:
<
p>
I respect Joe Kennedy for his work at Citizens Energy but I honestly do not want him to run.
<
p>First of all I want a candidate who has been actively and recently engaged in local and national issues, all the Congressmen and Martha Coakley have all been recently, locally, nationally, and actively engaged politically in the issues. Joe Kennedy has been politically disinterested for at least a decade and never spoke up about the important issues that happened in the last ten years. Would he have voted for the war? Where does he stand on gay marriage? Those are large unknowns and its less credible for him to say he supports progressive positions while his opponents have been actively fighting for them for while he has been in semi-retirement.
<
p>And your right JimC. Joe made a mediocre Congressmen because he was bored with legislation, bored with constituent services, and bored with Washington. This is why he wanted to be Governor. And then he chickened out when the seat was practically handed to him and his ambitions and dreams (possibly presidential?) died down. He just does not seem to have the stomach or the attention span to be a great Senator for Massachusetts.
<
p>Also I think it goes against the spirit of progressive politics to favor nepotism, even elected nepotism. Ted Kennedy created a society that could elect Barack Obama President. It also could elect the sons and daughters of working class people to the seat. I respect and admire all three frontrunners for the Senate seat. Capuano, Coakley, and Lynch all come from working families, are a lot more in tune with the trials and travails working people are facing during this tough economic crisis. That experience to me sets them apart from Joe Kennedy who has lived a life of wealth and privilege removed from the concerns of ordinary people. The great thing about Ted is he made those concerns his own, I just don’t think Joe Kennedy can cut it the same way.
<
p>We have some really great candidates, in the words of John F. Kennedy “it is time for a new generation of leadership” and I would happily vote for any of the candidates mentioned who are all supremely qualified and capable before I would vote for Joe Kennedy.
I don’t think there is anything inherently wrong with Joe Kennedy as a senator to have this kind of comment.
<
p>You don’t want him to run? That’s a bit much.
<
p>I’m in favor for anyone to run, then I can make a decision of who I think would be represent me.
I harbor no dislike for Joe Kennedy personally or even politically, I just simply believe that he is not the most qualified or capable candidate, compared to the other names mentioned. I also think it goes against the very principle progressive politics and open government to simply ‘pass the seat down’ from one Kennedy to another, even if the voters choose to do so.
<
p>I think that Capuano, Coakley, and Lynch are all better qualified because they have been engaged in actual political battles more recently, they have more relevant experience, and I think they would bring new perspectives and ideas to the position. Joe would simply be overshadowed by the legacy of his predecessor. To be fair that is a problem for anybody with a predecessor like Ted Kennedy to follow, but I think the family dynamics will put a lot more pressure on him that his past seems to indicate he can’t handle.
<
p>He opted not to run for Governor in 98′ because he didn’t want to talk about his annulment or his brothers sex scandal. He seemed to be a public figure that intensely valued his privacy and seemed reluctant to even enter the fray, so I suspect for those reasons he will stay out. If he enters it means he caved in to family pressure and that is even less endearing in a future Senator.
<
p>To be clear I would vote for Joe Kennedy over any of his potential Republican opponents were he to win the nomination, but I would not vote for him in the primary-there are simply too many better candidates to choose from.
<
p>Good to know I’m right, but I didn’t say that. I think Joe was a good Congressman.
You stated that Joe could’ve ‘walked into’ the Governors Office and implied he was bored where he was. I simply agreed with that sentiment. The ‘mediocre Congressmen’ comment is mine alone to make and I stand by it. Didn’t mean to imply you agreed with that as well.
I don’t want Joe Kennedy to run either but only because so many other candidates have said that they would not if he did. The deference is privilege and privilege means we may not get the best candidate on the ballot.
Joe is not only a nephew of Ted, he’s a son of Bobby. Seat is his for the taking if he runs and doesn’t shove foot in mouth too often.
Is Ed Markey really interested in the seat even if Joe Kennedy’s out? Seems to me like he’d be giving up a pretty good gig in the house for becoming the 100th out of 100 senators. At 63, he’s not old, but it will take a couple of terms before he’s got even a fraction of the seniority he has in the House.
I think it’s unlikely that Markey will make a serious run. He’s in great shape where he is — like Barney Frank, he can do more good for what he cares about and for the people he represents by staying put.
He’s not that old, and even if he loses he could back to a safe House seat. He loses nothing by trying (except the bank wad he has spent years building).
<
p>I agree re: his issue work. Given that John Dingell is on the way, Markey is now right behind Henry Waxman to chair the first or second most committee in the House — Energy and Commerce — when the chairman retires. Still, Henry is spry and will never want to leave that job so Markey may never get it…
<
p>If I were Markey I would do it, but I bet he stays out, and we get a field which includes Coakley, Lynch, Capuano, and maybe Meehan.
I would agree that he is likely to stay put even with Joe Kennedy out of the running. Markey would’ve been the front runner for Kerry’s seat five years ago had he won, but now I think his clout in Congress has gone up and his name recognition stat-wide has gone down. Two things that should keep him out of the race. Also Henry Waxman is over 70 years old and Markey would be the front-runner to take his place over at Energy and Commerce.
<
p>Meehan is even more unlikely. While Markey could keep his day job and still run, Meehan would have to give up the UMASS post and its six figure job and seven figure pension. He really ought to just give his campaign funds to charity or to needy Democratic candidates-he ain’t going nowhere.
<
p>But…
<
p>If Markey ran, Meehan ran, or Meehan and Markey ran presuming Joe Kennedy was out and Capuano, Coakley, and Lynch were in it benefits Lynch considerably.
<
p>I would argue that Lynch has a built in 25% of the state-wide vote with right of center Dems, which puts him in a bad position normally but in a special election where turnout is lower and left with older and more conservative voters he stands to gain. Also in a plurality election that 25% plus any independents he draws in will likely put him over the top if the liberal majority is split three or four ways. Arguably even if its split just two ways since Capuano and Coakley also are splitting a geographic base (Middlesex County) as well. So if Lynch runs he is banking on these factors occurring.
<
p>I think he could also do well if it is him v Joe Kennedy.
IIRC, a similar argument was made in the 1998 Congressional primary that if the liberal field was fractured, then Ray Flynn would win. The liberal field was fractured, but Mike Capuano won anyway.
<
p>Frankly, I think a crowded field benefits Coakley more than Lynch because she has statewide name recognition already and whatever advantage she may have with women voters will be a big factor if you can win with a sub 30% plurality.
The ‘geographic base’ argument could end up working in favor of Coakley since her ‘base’ is arguably the whole state. She is definitely the front runner if Joe stays out. Out of the Congressmen though I think Lynch has the best shot due to the liberal split and his solid base of support.
<
p>As for Ray Flynn he was also a carpetbagger which hurt him IMO.
He had been Mayor of Boston and the district is mostly Boston. Even if he had to move across the city, that’s too little difference to be a carpetbagger.
Flynn lived in South Boston his entire life before renting an East Boston apartment to run for the Congressional seat. Granted, he didn’t move very far. But in our city of parochial neighborhoods, moving from the 9th to 8th districts is a bigger move than geography alone would suggest.
I agree that keeping the seat in the family is the least compelling reason for a possible Joe Kennedy candidacy. But here are some reasons I would support him:
<
p>
Either Ed Markey or Martha Coakley would be a worthy candidate, but it feels like ladder-climbing for them, with only an incremental gain for us. Getting Joe back in Congress would be a plus with no corresponding minus, and he’s the one I could be most enthusiastic working for.
a dynamic that was talked about a few weeks ago but not heard lately, was for one of the senior MA Congressmen to go after it with the thinking that MA is likely to lose a seat with the coming Census redistricting, and this would be a way to retain the legislative expertise in DC by providing a slot for somebody to slide into. Whether it would be Capuano, Markey, or the recently departed Meehan is unknown, but the idea was floated.
I like that actually since I think lifetime incumbency is bad. We get a new AG in 2010, probably Leone which leads to a new DA in Middlesex County, which possibly leads to new state reps, state senators, and/or city councilors in the county, etc. Or alternatively we get a new congressmen, new state officials, etc. I think its the only way office change in this state is when those seats open up.
Maybe all organizations devolve to family control. Ted got to be senator by being the President’s brother and he ran against Eddie McCormack, nephew of the House speaker, then HC Lodge, the senator’s grandson.
<
p>This isn’t just government and government agencies. I was amazed at how many family members were at Polaroid, Digital, Gillette.
<
p>Even the Mafia is family.
<
p>When the government collapses, you’d best be in the strongest family.
<
p>An ounce of blood is worth more than a pound of friendship. ~Spanish Proverb