Three Arguments in Favor of Porter Goss
President Bush today announced that Florida Rep. Peter Goss is his choice to be the new Director of Central Intelligence. I don't know much about Goss beyond what I've seen very recently in the media, and the announcement seems to have drawn mixed results. Centrist Democrats seem to be muted in their opposition, while the loudest cries are coming from folks like Nancy Pelosi. While I understand where the opponents are coming from, personally, I think this is a stupid fight for the Dems to get in right now for three reasons.
1. Goss appears to be qualified. He served in the CIA and has been the chairman of the House Committee overseeing intelligence activities. While he can certainly be criticized for some of his actions, and he may be a partisan Republican, he is not without relevant expertise, as, say, Tom Ridge was when tapped for the important role of Homeland Security Secretary. As far as choices go, there are many worse than Goss.
2. It's the President's call. In general, Presidents should get the benefit of the doubt for their cabinet picks, unless there is serious reason to suspect that the nominee is dishonest, blatantly incompetent, or a complete hack. Goss appears to clear this bar. If he's the wrong guy, Bush will need to answer for his decision at the polls, sooner rather than later. Since the DCI serves at the pleasure of the President, a new Administration can replace him if he doesn't fit their policy requirements.
3. It's a good time for Dems to set a conspicuous example of non-partisanship. There is reason to hope that President-elect Kerry will be offering his slate of cabinet nominees to the Senate in a few months. Among those are almost certain to be some Democrats with positions not to the liking of conservative Republican Senators. Let Bush have his lame-duck DCI; don't give the Republicans a grievance they can point to in holding up Kerry's nominees. This won't stop the worst partisan obstructionists, who have neither shame nor honor, but it may help with the public.
Obviously, in the best of all possible worlds, it would be better to have a DCI who is not also a party politico. We were down that road before with the morally-repugnant Bill Casey (Reagan's campaign manager in 1980), whose ideological fervor embroiled him and the administration in the Iran-Contra scandal. But the fact is, Bush is still President and he still gets to exercise executive judgment over who should fill key roles. Democrats should question Goss aggressively in the nomination hearings, and watch him closely when he's in office, but on both principle and politics, this just doesn't seem to be the right venue for a partisan stand.
2:46:32 PM 
|
|
