RSS Feed MenuRemember back to late August when Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was announced as John McCain’s running mate? Within days, newspapers revealed that Gov. Palin’s daughter was expecting a child, that Palin’s husband Todd had been arrested for driving under the influence some twenty years prior, that Palin has been a member of the secessionist Alaskan Independence Party in the 1980s (which turned out not to be true), and that Palin herself was accused of illegally pressuring state officials to fire her former brother-in-law, a state trooper. These and other so-called revelations produced a number of press reports on the presumably sub-standard quality of the McCain campaign’s vice presidential selection process, including 1500 words from the New York Times saying that “Palin Disclosures Raise Questions on Vetting.”
To date, I’ve not seen similar reports on President Obama’s process for vetting his senior appointments, which has included:
- New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson pulling out of his nomination to be Commerce Secretary due to an FBI investigation of so-called “pay to play” practices in which recipients of state contracts were expected to raise funds for elected officials.
- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who was confirmed to the spot despite not having paid over $34,000 in Social Security taxes during four years in which he worked at the International Monetary Fund. Geithner, like other American IMF employees, received and signed multiple statements indicating knowledge of his requirement to pay payroll taxes, for which in any case he received additional compensating pay from the IMF. (Meaning that, even had he paid his taxes, he would have paid no net taxes.)
- Health and Human Services nominee Tom Daschle, the former South Dakota Senator and Senate Majority Leader who withdrew his nomination after revelations that he had failed to pay over $146,000 in back taxes, and that he had delayed revealing this failure for a number of months.
- Chief performance officer designee Nancy Killefer backed out of the job after revelations that the District of Columbia placed a lien on her house after her failure to pay unemployment taxes for household help.
If one of their children gets pregnant out of wedlock, however, I’m sure the press’s full investigative resources will be brought to bear.
gblittle // Feb 4, 2009 at 7:19 am
I doubt you’ll see anything Andrew. You have more of a chance getting hit by a comet. A few, very few, like you may point this out but you have to remember that the MSM, for what ever reason, is not going to get critical of Obama or for that matter Democrats in general. From sweetheart loan deals, to tax problems outside the current Administration (Rangel) alls quite on the journalism front. Even on the latest ice storm in the midsouth you heard little critical of FEMA’s (now Obama’s baby) response.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 7:42 am
Where are there so many login problems with this site?
To answer your question, is because left-wing blogs do a much better job of spreading information and in some cases disinformation than right wing blogs. Republicans basically accepted Obama’s and Biden’s narratives and did no questioning.
dendup // Feb 4, 2009 at 9:11 am
So stop whining and write the story yourself.
Oneon1isto // Feb 4, 2009 at 9:58 am
Oh how short our memories are. Daschle and Richardson had a more thorough vetting because they’re part of the establishment or (in Richardson’s case) ran a Presidential campaign. I guarantee you Obama had met all of these people before. McCain had met Palin, what, once? Come now, you know there’s a difference here, Andrew. Your post on SS means your better than this. And anyway, you can find reams of info on both of them. The rush to find out info on Palin is simply because she was a virtual unknown, and there was a vacuum to fill.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:06 am
Oneon1isto-Why has there been so little investigation of Senator Gillibrand’s background? She won a congressional race where was down by double-digits after a mysterious leak of the incumbent’, John Sweeney’s domestic police report which was believed to have been done by someone in Governor Pataki’s office. It was rumored the Pataki and D’Amato did not like Sweeney and Gillibrand being the daughter of a good friend of theirs may have gotten the benefit.
In general, there are a number of unresolved discrepencies about Gillibrand’s career that have only been talked about on blogs like this one. For an unknown Congresswoman and now-Senator, if what you were saying was true than she would have gotten the Palin treatment.
Dendup-If you are willing to pay me so that I can quit my job where I am limited in what I can and cannot say publicly than I would be happy to write the story.
Oneon1isto // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:16 am
ireign – I don’t like that she’s unvetted either, but perhaps you should read the story I’m responding to, and why Andrew’s comparison doesn’t hold water. And once again, let me emphasize the difference between announcing an unheard-VP for the country in the middle of an extremely high-strung campaign season, and an appointment to replace Clinton in upstate NY in January. One could become President, the other is replacing HRC, who has skeletons of her own. Come now.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:32 am
Until recently, Senator of New York was almost as powerful a position as Vice President. Moreover, there should be a bigger vetting process for an appointed position than an elected one.
The fact is Obama’s vetting process leaves a lot to be desired. Daschle was the Senator of South Dakota and had never properly been vetted. Richardson, would have been vetted more if he can closer to being a top tier candidate. However, the limited vetting he received in the media should have raised some red flags.
Andrew’s comparison does hold water.
Moreover, on a slightly different but related point Republicans are more likely to have undergo a thorough vetting process in the blogosphere and in the traditional media outlets. When Arnold ran for governor in Los Angeles, the LA Times did a tremendous amount of investigatory work (unfortunately, he was elected anyway).
Thus, it is more important that the Obama team do a thorough job than say McCain because the press isn’t as thorough. Why wouldn’t Geithner have been more thoroughly vetted primary to his being named treasury secretary? The guy is responsible for helping to turn around the economy during a bad recession. I would emphasize that his position is considerably more important than the VP job.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:34 am
BTW, how is the fact that Obama met Richardson or Daschle multiple teams relevant to the thoroughness of his vetting team? I am sure after the presidential debates when they talked in the green room, Obama never discussed with Richardson any potential problems back in New Mexico.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:39 am
meant to say multiple times rather than multiple teams.
Oneon1isto // Feb 4, 2009 at 10:44 am
You’re kind of assuming that a proper vetting overturns all stones in a person’s past, when in most of these tax cases the individual either wasn’t aware or it had been already been paid back and was seen as a non-issue. Kind of jumping the gun, I think. As I recall Obama had assembled an economic transition team to handle his planning pretty much the day after he won. You can bet they had some say on this appointment. As for why meeting face to face matters, this is Human Interaction 101 stuff. Meeting face to face is an strong indicator and key to our perceptions about someone. That’s why business travel is so important, meeting face to face tells you a lot. Mannerisms give you insight into character. Would you hire someone you’ve never met?
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 11:23 am
Any person who credibly thinks that not paying the full amount on your taxes, especially when you are talking about over $100,000, is not a big deal is hopelessly naive. In Geithner’s case, that pointed to general incompetence. Every other IMF official seems to know the rules.
Obviously, meeting someone face to face is important but not for the purpose that you were arguing i.e. vetting. And no I don’t think you necessarily get insight into someone’s character. Plenty of people are deceived by politicians who by and large are incredibly good at making a good impression when meeting with someone and engaging in small-talk.
Oneon1isto // Feb 4, 2009 at 12:43 pm
I don’t mean to quibble but A) It’s not 100k, it’s around 35k. B) “Every other IMF official knows the rules” means what? IMF directors know the tax code? Right. Maybe as NY Fed chairman he should’ve but whatever. Anyway, by your own admission you say its basic incompetence. None of this is to say a proper vetting did (or didn’t) take place. I’d point to a strong assumption that yes, a vetting did take place because of Obama’s economic team, Geithner’s resume, and either this lump wasn’t discovered or wasn’t considered an issue in light of the man’s resume and experience. As for the “purpose” behind meeting someone face to face that I was referring to, it’s the same. Hiring someone for the upper most level of your team in business is the same as hiring for a position in the Federal Government. You vet, you research, and you decide who’s best. I suppose the difference in opinion lies in I’m giving the Obama team the benefit of the doubt because all signs, except this one blemish, support thorough vetting. In Palin’s case, all signs pointed toward a distinct lack of vetting.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 2:37 pm
1. I was referring to Daschle with regards to the “over $100k” comment. However, if you are going to quibble (despite your protests otherwise) Geithner failed to pay close to $49,000 in taxes ($34,000 was just two years of his back taxes), total. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123187503629378119.html
A proper vetting should have discovered this. Obviously, it would have been considered an issue.
2. There wasn’t just one blemish. There was Daschle and Richard as well. In both cases, it was the candidate and not the vetting team who came forward with the problem.
3. “In Palin’s case, all signs pointed toward a distinct lack of vetting.” I agree that McCain should have met with Palin more times but you have no empirical evidence to support your contention other than citing the NY Times and other newspapers who endorsed Obama that said there was a “distinct lack of vetting” The McCain campaign says there was. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13089.html
Classic case of he says, she says.
4. Obviously, like many people you have a problem with Palin that goes far beyond whether she was properly vetted. If you want to be intellectually honest about it, just admit it and move on.
ireign // Feb 4, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Oneon1isto, the IMF provided numerous warnings to U.S. employees about payroll taxes. According to IMF documents released by the Senate Finance panel, Mr. Geithner regularly received information about his tax obligations
sinz54 // Feb 5, 2009 at 10:34 am
You left out the most obvious reason: The political campaign is over, for just about everybody but us political junkies. Right now, Americans aren’t being asked to make choices between elected officials. And hence, stories about appointees of a new Administration after the election are just not as newsworthy as stories about important members of a political campaign before the election. And you don’t have the opposition party doing as much to spread the damaging information, because they’re no longer running for office. Despite that, I used Google News to find:
Bill Richardson: over 3,000 news stories; Geithner: over 3,000 news stories; Tom Daschle: over 8,000 news stories; plus over 8,000 news stories discussing Obama’s nomination problems generally.
sinz54 // Feb 5, 2009 at 10:45 am
The initial reaction to Sarah Palin’s nomination for Vice President was surprise, and then a number of reasonably positive news stories about her. What then exploded into the headlines was the revelation that Sarah Palin, favorite of the social conservatives and Christian evangelicals, had a daughter who was bearing an illegitimate child. This after Rush Limbaugh had said long before, that any girl who gets pregnant out of wedlock is a reflection on that girl’s parents. That made the story just too delicious to ignore. And once the press sniffed blood, they were like wolves all over the victim, looking for more meat. A big risk for the GOP in upholding “traditional values” is that they will catch a whole lot of heat, when some of their members appear to fall short of that high moral standard. Even those Democrats who appear to be holier-than-thou will catch the same huge heat. Case in point: ex-Governor Eliot Spitzer.
larryo // Feb 5, 2009 at 12:21 pm
sinz, I think a bigger risk than the obvious hypocrisy of the “family values” crowd is the incessant lying in which Palin, McCain et al indulged and in which the Republican congressional leaders still indulge. They are still living in the time before the internet, when they could tell these whoppers and no one outside the beltway would know. The latest charade is their continued insistence that tax cuts for the investing class will stimulate the economy despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
ireign // Feb 5, 2009 at 4:11 pm
larryo, are you a Republican? I am guessing not. The vetting problems continue. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/02/05/solis_senate_session_canceled.html?hpid=topnews
Do any Obama’s nominees actually pay their taxes?