|
I have read about the thoroughness of Obama's vetting process. Records are being reviewed, and people are being interviewed. The downside, of course, is that this process makes it difficult to keep potential appointees under wraps. How can you asked about Janet Napalitano, for example, without someone asking, "Who are you and why are you asking?"
Obama apparently has made the decision that he would rather suffer some drama as part of the vetting process, rather than suffer though surprises during the confirmation process. He also appears to be working the Senate for preliminary views regarding the opposition that will be given to potential picks, and this is an early test of which Senators will promise their support of a pick, but ultimately prove un-trustworthy.
So, for better or worse, I think this early drama is by design, and the actual confirmation hearings are intended to be anti-climatic, because all of the rough work is being done right now. With Bill Clinton and Lani Guanier and Zoe Baird, Bill suffered several set-backs during confirmation hearings. The issue is whether the pre-vetting process if the better approach or whether Bill's approach was superior.
|