Working Through my Caroline Issues

by Amy Z. Quinn

Maybe it's just the season, but every time I think about Caroline Kennedy seeking the Senate seat from New York, I get this picture in my mind of New York Gov. David Paterson as Santa Claus, handing out a powerful office as a political reward like a Lexus with a super-size red bow. Kennedy gets the seat because she's just been such a good girl this year. A lovely holiday tale, to be sure.

It's not that I have anything against Kennedy — if anything, she's been the most consistently nonembarrassing member of that whole clan. And it's not as if I'm so naïve that I think money doesn't buy political power, or that it's unheard of to reward someone for party loyalty with a plum appointment.

So why do I begrudge her this Senate seat?

Is it a lack of accomplishments? Because Caroline Kennedy largely shunned the limelight these past years, choosing to raise her three children as relative noncelebrities, I could be assuming she hasn't done anything worthy during that time, or at least not anything that really counts. But that's a classic mommy trap, and not true: She's got a law degree from Columbia, has done charity work, authored and edited books (including A Patriot's Handbook, one of my favorites). She's also done the neverending work of carrying the name and legacy of a deceased celebrity parent, a special kind of baggage only the Lisa Maries and Frances Beans of the world ever bear. No, Kennedy's done plenty — certainly more than some other senators.

Is it because of a dearth of relevant experience? Honestly, if the question is whether Kennedy has the "experience" to be a senator, it's not a stretch to say she does. Besides the diamond-encrusted resume, Kennedy can certainly hang, intellectually and professionally, with the veterinarians, exterminators and lawyers currently serving in Congress. She's well-educated, comfortable in political circles and has a personal narrative seemingly beyond reproach.

Is it because her positions are unknown? Well, we learned this week that Kennedy supports gay-marriage rights and abortion rights, backs Obama's troop withdrawal plan for Iraq, and wants to restore a ban on assault weapons and keep the Bush administration's tax cuts in place for now. Agree or disagree, do you know that much more about your current sitting senators' beliefs?

Maybe it's because of her celebrity that I'm reticent about Kennedy. One argument against the ostensible candidate is that her name is her biggest qualification for office. But really, she's not alone in this — right here in Pennsylvania, MSNBC's Chris Matthews is considering a run for what is currently Arlen Specter's Senate seat, and being taken seriously largely because of his name. I don't know if Matthews should be taken seriously — but being famous probably shouldn't be a disqualifying trait. And look who Kennedy'd be replacing: Celebrity was no disqualifier for Sen. Hillary Clinton.

In truth, Kennedy can't be accused of trading on her surname any more than brother John was when he fancied himself an editor and launched George magazine back in 1995. And certainly she's better-qualified than her cousin Patrick was when he was elected to Congress at age 28.

But that brings us to the rub. At least Patrick had to be elected. Kennedy is asking simply to be given nearly a full term in the Senate. And that makes all the other things — the late-in-the-game policy positions, the trading on her name — seem a lot more gratuitous.

When I think about that New York Senate seat, I think about Clinton. Yes, Clinton had a big name and, obviously, a big head start because of it. But she still got her Senate seat the hard way. There's a big difference between getting millions of New Yorkers to the polls, and getting one governor in the bag (and we know how readily some governors will jump in the bag these days). We need all the women in Congress we can get, but why should Kennedy go about things any differently? It's hardly betraying the sisterhood to expect Clinton's successor be elected.

If Kennedy wants to be a senator, terrific. She might eventually be great. But she'll never be respected until she earns it. And it certainly doesn't serve democracy, let alone New Yorkers, for her to jockey for the office in a way that subverts the democratic process. Let someone else be a seat warmer for a few years. Then, instead of acting like American royalty, go get the seat the American way.

Citizen Mom blogs at quinchannel.typepad.com.