In case you’ve taken your eye off the latest transition news…here’s an update…and once again much of oxygen in the room is being sucked up by speculation over Hillary Clinton.
It seems likely that Clinton will – in the end – be Obama’s Secretary of State. But George Stephanopoulos is reporting this morning, Senator Clinton is not 100% sure she wants it. Here’s what George writes: "She’s concerned about giving up the independence she has as a senator. She also has to worry about the $7.6 million campaign debt she still has from her presidential bid."
Concern too has be rising over Bill Clinton’s earnings. What sort of restrictions can and will be placed on the former President’s speaking tours?
Add to the mix an interesting take by Tom Friedman in today’s NY Times on whether or not Hillary is the best choice for the job. Obama’s much touted ‘team of rivals’ approach may not work that well when it comes to the peculiarities of State.
Here’s Friedman’s reasoning: "My question is whether a President Obama and a Secretary of State Clinton, given all that has gone down between them and their staffs, can have that kind of relationship, particularly with Mrs. Clinton always thinking four to eight years ahead, and the possibility that she may run again for the presidency. I just don’t know. Every word that is said between them in public, and every leak, will be scrutinized for what it means politically and whether there is daylight. That is not a reason not to appoint Mrs. Clinton. But it is a reason for everyone around the president-elect to take a deep breath and ask whether they are prepared to have the kind of air-tight relationship with Mrs. Clinton that is required for effective diplomacy. When it comes to appointing a secretary of state, you do not want a team of rivals."