Ambinder suggests the news that Ron Klain will be appointed the Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff creates a "dilemma." To which I reply, huh? Ambers is looking for controversy where none exists. While I'm sure the "people freak out because Obama hires experienced staff instead of people who entered politics after March 2007" is a nice story-line to concoct, it really has no basis in reality. Obama promised change in explicitly policy-oriented terms. When he said things like, "that's the change we need," the line was inevitably preceded by his health care plan, or his tax plan, or some kind of program. There are good examples in this October speech. So when Ambinder writes that Obama supporters "will be -- and ought to be -- extra anxious to hold Obama accountable for his process promises -- a transparent White House, a transparent federal government, clear and unambiguous executive orders, etc.," does he have any reason to believe that Obama won't do these things, other than because, well, it's hard? It's silly for Ambers to conjure fake hand-wringing before these decisions have been made. In fact, I wandered over to DailyKos, which is your go-to source for people demanding accountability from Obama (cf. Lieberman, Joe). Here's the diary I found on Klain. Typical comment: "Congrats, Mr. Klain - you've got a great new boss!" Also, a quibble with this: "[Obama] turned to symbolism (no lobbyist donations) over substance (staying in the public financing system)." Er, not really. I'd say not accepting lobbyist donations is relatively substantial, just as McCain's decision to borrow money against his future public funds in violation of his own law was pretty symbolic of something. Does Ambinder think that Obama is more likely to be influenced by lobbyists and special interests than John McCain would have been if he were elected? Does he see a meaningful difference between Obama accepting private donations and the many, many advertisements the McCain campaign ran using shared RNC funds, which included private lobbyist donations? One thing that we learned long ago about McCain-Feingold is that while it has good points (transparency, contribution limits, etc.) it also doesn't keep money out of politics. So, wait and see. If Obama brings change, it will have a title like "Universal Health Care Act of 2009," not "Vice-Presidential Chief of Staff."
--Tim Fernholz
