Kirsten Gillibrand to take Clinton’s Senate Seat

Dear Friend and Reader,

Kirsten Gillibrand may be a Democrat, but she’s fiscally conservative, is against gun control, marriage equality and is anti-choice, and voted for the 2008 Farm Bill, which actually hurts local farms. She may be blond, and she may be a woman, but that doesn’t make her anything like a proper replacement for Hilary Clinton.

Kirsten Gillibrand. Photo courtesy of US Congress.
Kirsten Gillibrand. Photo courtesy of US Congress.

Gov. Paterson will make the official announcement at 12 noon EST today, but the word is out: 42-year-old Sagittarius, Kirsten Gillibrand, will be filling Hilary Clinton’s empty senate seat. Earlier this week, Caroline Kennedy pulled out of the race, stating that she wants to spend time with her ailing uncle Ted.

Gillibrand is Congresswoman for the 20th district in New York, one that includes everything from the Saratoga racetrack to FDR’s residence to the Adirondacks, New York’s greatest wilderness area. According to The New York Times, she’s been endorsed by the National Rifle Association, making her an interesting pick, both to replace Clinton and as a Democrat.

Unlike other candidates for the seat, Gillibrand is born and bred in New York State. She has an undergraduate degree from Dartmouth and her law degree from UCLA. Gillibrand has previously worked for the Clinton administration, as Special Counsel to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). She’s been a big advocate for developing and investing in low-income areas.

I haven’t seen a complete list of her positions, but Gillibrand looks like a real upstate girl: she opposes gun control, is a member of the Blue Dogs: Democrats in favor of fiscal conservatism. She supported the contentious 2008 Farm Bill. The Bill, while it had some good provisions, predominantly “commits the federal government to subsidizing the destruction of family farming for another five years and invests little in the future of rural communities.” В And her position on immigration? She opposed Elliot Spitzer’s plan to give illegal immigrants licenses.

All in all, she’s pretty conservative for a Democrat and a confusing pick to replace Clinton: you can read a more complete list of Gillibrand’s positions on her official congressional website. Note the absence of reproductive rights and LGBT rights on the page. Is she undecided, or just unwilling to say?

The answer: unwilling to say. I just heard on NPR that she is anti-abortion and opposes marriage equality. The only hope we have is that she’ll have to survive a vote next year to keep her seat, so hopefully she won’t do too much damage before then.

Yours & truly,

Rachel Asher

6 thoughts on “Kirsten Gillibrand to take Clinton’s Senate Seat”

  1. victoria… here in Bob Jones country, my votes for representation never amount to much, unfortunately. There are more of “them” than there are of “me.”

    But Congresspeople *represent*. That is their job. Their job is not to *lead,* and I don’t *intend* for them to lead. I intend for them to *represent* me.

    I’d like to throw out there, for mastication purposes, the idea that we should all be grouping together geographically in order to get the kind of representation in Congress that reflects us best. I’m thinking about it a lot more these days. Mostly, I guess, I don’t feel *safe* where I am. My current representatives will only lead me places where I *don’t* want to go.

    When I cast my vote for President, that’s where I cast my vote for someone to *lead* us all. We have a terrific *leader* now, in President Obama. And the people who don’t follow him are gonna get left behind. I don’t want to be one of those. I’m a Uranian, not a Saturnian.

  2. victoria:

    there’s nary a difference between lawyers and politicians. Most politicians are lawyers.

    As for politicians, yes they do have votes to keep, and apparently Gillibrand kept hers according to her read of her constituency, also to their read of her.

    If she is really to represent NY State, she needs to listen to all of NY State and New Yorkers need to tell her what they need–all of them.

    I’ve had to put up with Feinstein as my Senator, even though I know personally what she feels and how she votes and why. Until there is a viable solution, like a more progressive Democrat who won’t go into lock step with the former hawk goons like Bush and vote for a war we shouldn’t have fought, we’ve got her. You’d better believe she’s heard from me over the years about the war, and Bush’s Cabinet appointments these last eight years.

    We need more progressive Democrats, not less. That means alot of re-building on our part. ALot less cynicism. Alot more face time with our legislators. Our standards have been kicked to the curb because we’ve had a majority of Republicans in Congress and the White House. So a Democrat, any Democrat will do. This is a signal that we all have our work cut out for us if we want change to happen on a local level.

    By the way, visiting Eric in Kingston around the New Years’ weekend I was impressed with his district’s rep Maurice Hinchey (or Mo, as they call him), who basically holds office at the local cafe. The guy gets around and hears what his people think and need. This to me is politics of the old school – like early eighteenth and 19th century–and old school in a good way. local, vocal, and involved in the world.

    Gillibrand I hear, is similar at least in process. She needs more voices to reach her and shape her views. You can change your leaders, but they need to hear the wheel squeak.

  3. Fe, I think what has been knowlege to you is new to me. Politicians are always held to their votes like it is what they personally believe in. I guess I bought into that. And that is double stamped when they are referred to as leaders, because leadership involves believing in what one is leading.

    But I guess it is their job to represent the electors they represent. It makes the electoral college vote thing more understandable to me.

    To my mind, it is like the lawyer who needs to defend the client she knows is guilty. I just don’t have the kind of mentality that could represent something I don’t believe in. How these people do their jobs I do not know.

  4. victoria:

    This is politics of expediency. Gillibrand represented a Republican-leaning district and eked out a victory against a Republican in her last election.

    She now has to represent the entire state, north and south, so her views have to get more “global”. She would say, if I were her communications consultant, that she “needs to represent the breadth and depth of the entire population of the state of New York”.

    That is a broad enough statement to keep her out of trouble for the next few years, isn’t it?

    So the switch seems like a flip flop, but more importantly, New Yorkers should use this opportunity to hold her to her full-state representation. If I were a New York state resident, I would be calling on her to remind her who her new constituency is.

  5. Fe, what’s with the flip floppy? Did she have a commitment as an elected leader to be the voice of the district she represents? What a rotten job.

    So she was actually a representative for her districts views? That’s not really a leader then, is it?

  6. Here’s comment on today’s appointment by the Great Orange Satan himself: Markos Moulitsas (aka Kos of Daily Kos):

    NY-Sen: The much better outcome
    by kos

    Fri Jan 23, 2009 at 09:12:22 AM PST

    There’s a lot of hyperventilating today about how the mean bloggers destroyed Caroline Kennedy, as though I had a direct line to Paterson’s office and called the shots. No, I’m not a Kennedy. My family wasn’t rich and powerful and famous, so I don’t get direct lines to anyone.

    But, goes this theory, thanks to our efforts to “destroy” Kennedy (by fighting their desire for monarchy), we’re now stuck with a Blue Dog in the Senate.

    To me, this is a win-win situation. There are two alternatives:

    Gillibrand was voting her districts, and will now tack hard to the left as she represents a much more liberal New York, or
    She gets primaried and a more progressive Democrats — one chosen by the voters! — gets in. Heck, it could even be Caroline Kennedy, assuming she isn’t afraid to face real voters!
    Gillibrand is an accomplished politician who won in a brutally difficult House seat. But what made her successful in that district won’t make her successful statewide. So she either adapts, or she dies. And in the end, it’ll be the voters making that call.

    As it should be.

    Update: And the evolution begins.

    “After talking to Kirsten Gillibrand, I am very happy to say that New York is poised to have its first U.S. Senator who supports marriage equality for same-sex couples,” Van Capelle said.

    “She also supports the full repeal of the federal DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) law, repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) and passage of legislation outlawing discrimination against transgender people. While we had a productive discussion about a whole range of LGBT concerns, I was particularly happy to hear where she stands on these issues.”

    Gillibrand wouldn’t have been caught dead with this kind of unambiguous support for gay rights in her House district.

Leave a Comment