Al Giordano confirms that Dodd might take the SFRC chairmanship back in '11.

[beachmom]

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/richardson-obstacle-renegotiating-nafta

Lots of interesting nuggets in this post, but here are the Kerry related ones:

US Senator Chris Dodd (D-Connecticut) has only relinquished his dibs on chairing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for the next two years (he faces reelection in 2010 and doesn't want to give up his powerful Banking chairmanship seat before then), but Dodd's seniority could entitle him to push US Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) out come 2011.

Speaking of Kerry, his role in the 2005 debate over the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) might indicate that he'll take a leading role in re-making NAFTA over the next Congressional session. Kerry pushed an amendment three years ago to protect US and Central American workers in the trade deal, but was outvoted by the then-Republican majority. Kerry had supported the passage of NAFTA in 1993, but the destructive results of the trade deal have turned him into one of the Senate's leading critics of "free trade" deals without worker and environmental protections.

Here is is his amendment:

http://kerry.senate.gov/v3/headlines/Kerry-CAFTA-amendment.pdf

Obviously, we don't know what the future will hold, but it goes without saying that Dodd is not as good as Kerry on matters of foreign policy. Alas, the seniority system is what it is. I really hope Dodd can be satisfied with staying on Banking or perhaps there is another committee he can chair. That'll suck big time if Kerry is forced to relinquish his chairmanship. Two years is not a long enough tenure to get what needs to be done.

[MBS]

1. I thought that Dodd was at least considering retirement after 2010

though with a Dem senate and Dem white house, he might well change his mind (if the blog rumor I read was even correct in the first place).

Anyway, I hope that JK gets to hang onto his SFRC chairmanship for as long as he wants it.

[beachmom]

2. No, Dodd was never going to retire in '10. That was only for accounting reasons.

http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=228

Well, while legally true, CT Dems shouldn't start licking their chops about the supposed "open seat" in three years. In order to transfer all of his money he raised for his 2010 re-election to his WH campaign account without penalty, he had to file a statement with the FEC saying he wouldn't run. It's simply an accounting thing, nothing more. In fact, should Dodd not be elected POTUS in '08, he, indeed can legally open a new Senate 2010 account. He did this so that he could raise maximum amounts from donors who gave to that 2010 campaign account.

An inquiry to Dodd's campaign about the above mentioned story prompted the following response from spokesperson Beneva Schulte: "It's a legality that isn't an indication of future plans."

[MBS]

3. thanks for clarification

This makes sense (well, political sense, anyway). But I STILL hope that Dodd doesn't press his "rights" on this issues, and that JK gets to hang on to chairmanship of SFRC for as long as he wants it.

[beachmom]

4. Me, too, MBS. But don't count on it. Seniority is very powerful.

I think the only way to override it is Harry Reid or perhaps a caucus vote (like they did for Lieberman). And that would really be messy. If Dodd wants it, he gets it.

[Mass]

5. I would mean Dodd wants this chairmanship. In fact, it has been said that he would prefer

the chairmanship of the HELP committee, which I obviously hope is not free anytime soon. While Al is often right on how he judges people, he is not always right on what is going to happen or not.

I would not spend too much time on what will happen in 2 years. Who knows what the situation will be?

[karynnj]

6. Two years is long enough that Kerry will likely by there to

push the global warming treaty through - as it is suppose to be finished by Dec 2009. If Kerry accomplishes that and is well regarded as SFRC chair as all of us expect him to be, a risk for Dodd if he takes it over, is that he will likely be negatively compared with Kerry, who is far more dynamic. Two years is a long enough time to make an impression. I watched Dodd on MTP when he was running for President and really really wanted to be impressed - because Kerry had already opted out. In addition, if Dodd does claim SFRC, I think Kerry can claim Commerce, where he can do the things he has spoken of on rail (if it isn't already passed) and making broadband internet available everywhere. Like you, I hope Kerry keeps it.

Look at the things Kerry led on when he had no committee assignment that would have made him the obvious leader. I doubt anyone could have done more with the Small Business Committee. (He never was on the veterans subcommittee or the Armed Services committee yet he has passed more legislation for vets than people who were.

The Giordano article is interesting on the trade issue as well - though I would guess that would be from either the Finance or the Commerce committee.

[Fabio]

7. you heard it hear first.

i mentioned this would happen nov 10th. and it is true.

nonetheless, 2 years is a long time in politics. Just kind of sucks in terms of building staff.

[karynnj]

8. Thank you for posting that back then

But, as you say 2 years is a long time in politics. I hadn't thought of the risk that the staffers take when the chair could change in 2 years.

[beachmom]

9. Yep. You outscooped Giordano. But I thought it news that he confirmed what you first mentioned.

I didn't consider the staffing angle. OTOH, can we blame Dodd for holding his spot on a coveted committee?

[JI7]

10. this shows it's not a job that nobody wants

and a little off topic but why are some people usually Clinton supporters spreading the bs that Kerry didn't want to be vetted because of Teresa's finances. trying to equate Teresa with Bill.