| In retrospect, I shouldn't have been surprised. But when I initially wrote that Kay Bailey Hutchison would not resign before March's primary, I hoped the news would spur one of the Democrats' top two politicians into the Gubernatorial race. I feel confident one of them could definitely beat Rick Perry, but, alas, I soon found myself writing a disappointing update: both were moving forward in a Senate election that probably won't occur until 2012. They were going full speed ahead, too.
Yah, I know she said, "Let me also be crystal clear about one thing. I will be resigning this Senate seat." But I thought she was crystal clear about resigning to run for governor, and I think some other Texans thought she was crystal clear about limiting herself to two terms. As Kuff insists so clearly, "Seriously, she's changed her story about when or if she'll resign more often than most people change clothes. I say her story will change again, and there's no evidence to suggest otherwise."
Even if you believe the Senator, she says she will wait until the Senate has finished considering Health Care Reform and Cap and Trade legislation. It might very well be a while before we see that latter item on the top of the Senate docket. We have to finish Health Care first, and it looks like financial regulation might follow as the Senate's next priority. By then, President Obama might be in a hard push for Deficit Reduction. There's no telling where Cap and Trade fits in.
But mainly, I just don't believer her.
So, what's the apparently likely scenario now? Bill White and John Sharp will wait, sitting on the bench until 2011 or even 2012. We could really use one of these men atop our 2010 ticket, though. John Sharp may be past his political prime, but he is the only active Democratic politician who has held statewide office in Texas. And Bill White is already raising money like a very legitimate gubernatorial contender, despite the contribution limits of federal campaigns. These two details alone make both men much better candidates than Tom Schieffer, Hank Gilbert, or Farouk Shami.
We're playing our B team out there. At best.
Both White and Sharp have legitimately good reasons to run for the U.S. Senate, but they can easily transform their reasoning into justifications for a run at the Governor's Mansion. I'll outline some of the basic ideas for them.
John Sharp
Sharp, despite a political career confined to the state level, wants to make a difference for the national economy and the national budget. He has stated this as primary reasoning multiple times.
His issues page declares the following:
Since Congress lacks the political will to cut spending, even when it knows our future prosperity depends on it, it's time to force them to reduce the deficit and safeguard vital public services like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. I have so little faith in both parties in the Congress that I believe this is the only solution.
John Sharp hopes to force Congress into action as 1 of 535 Congresspersons? Additionally, he wants to accomplish this while being the federal-government new guy of the 535, particularly as a new guy who distrusts the other 534? That sounds a bit far-fetched.
Instead, Sharp could take a page from Rick Perry's Influencing-National-Politics Playbook. Perry has used his job as the ultimate bully pulpit in national debates. The Texas Governor has particular creditability because Texas' energy industry and vibrant cities have held the state a bit higher than others during the economic downturn. Not that the Texas Governor can ever claim lone responsibility for the state's economy, but that doesn't matter to the talking heads on TV.
Unfortunately for Mr. Perry, he's made some crazy talk that has lessened his influence with true policy-makers. And he has that R next to his name, which doesn't appeal to the good people governing the country. As Governor, Sharp could have the same advantages as Perry and more. Sharp has a D next to his name and he speaks sensibly. He can use the Texas Governor's office as a very effective podium to help this country reduce its budget deficit.
Speaking of budget deficits, the state might need help avoiding one of its own in 2011. Texas would find John Sharp's leadership on the issue quite useful in Austin.
Bill White
If I had to write the first two lines on Bill White's resume, the first would be "Mayor of Houston," but the second might be "energy expert." That's what got him the job of Deputy Secretary of Energy with President Clinton. There, he probably learned the amazing capacity of the federal government to affect climate change and energy usage in America. It makes since he would want to go to the Senate, where the laws are really made, to influence our energy future. With no set date for Cap and Trade in the Senate, he could, in theory, arrive in time for that debate, too.
But much of the country is making significant strides regarding energy efficiency and reform. Cap and Trade, like Health Care Reform, passed through the House of Representatives. Climate Change legislation has also found popularity in localities and other states in the country.
The larger problem, therefore, might not be in the Senate. White should realize that the biggest problem might reside right here in the "Coal Star State."
Polluters' draw to Texas could become hampered by national legislation imposing regulation on all the states, but the Texas government, as it stands now, will seek out every loophole to make Texas as friendly as possible for its oil and coal industries. The very easy start of a remedy is a caring governor to appoint quality members to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. The Governor also stands in an ideal position to push for further legislation to allow Texas an environmental quality worthy of its great countryside and terrain.
As an historic energy leader, Texas should rush to the forefront of clean energy. As Governor, White could push through innovative energy legislation that wouldn't see the light of day in the Senate's halls. The whole country, however, would have its eyes upon Governor White, because if we can find solutions to climate change in Texas, we can find them anywhere.
Conclusion
It would be a shame if Kay Bailey Hutchison changes her mind again, runs for reelection in 2012, and both these Democrats lose their personal potential from this year. I fear that if John Sharp doesn't find a 2010 election for himself, he will only continue to decline politically. I fear that a Bill White wait until '12 game would fail to take advantage of his high-water political capital.
There still may very well be an election in 2010. Jason Embry has talked about a November date, but I would hate to bet my two biggest pieces on such a hypothetical.
We may still need one of them in a 2010 Senate race, but I hope they at least take the time to sit down and consider their other options. In a change of events such as Kay Bailey Hutchison's recent announcement, I'd rather my politicians make clear efforts to consider the new obstacles and opportunities rather than move forward gung-ho to a destination shrouded in mystery. |
