I have a question that has bothered me since the beginning of this primary campaign, and I have seen very little discussion of it. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, how does she (and all of us who hope to beat McCain) plan to answer the following question when raised by McCain's supporters:
"The position of 'First Person,' like that of President, is one of public trust. Your husband, while serving as the most powerful CEO on earth, had sex in the workplace with a young intern. He then lied under oath about it--and lied repeatedly to the American people. He has been disbarred for his actions. Why should voters put someone who has abused the public trust this way in the White House as First Person? And what does it say about the Democratic party that you are asking us to do this?"
I can understand why Democrats are not asking this question out loud right now. But won't Republicans and Independents hammer Clinton on it all fall?
I am a lifelong Democrat who voted twice for Bill Clinton, and who tried to defend his conduct in discussions with Republican friends during the 90s, but I am even troubled myself by this question. For a whole range of reasons, including my feminism, I don't think that any CEO should have sex with an intern--even if the intern consents. I don't think that anyone should lie to the public about any type of workplace misconduct. I don't think anyone should lie under oath. And I don't think the President of the United States should do any of these things.
Make no mistake: I will vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination. Almost nothing would be worse than 4 more years of "McBush." But I'm not happy personally about giving Bill Clinton the position of "First Person." I'm a law professor, and I encourage my students to serve their profession with integrity. I also work with college students on civic engagement projects. I hear their deep concerns about the decline of honesty in public service. Having Bill Clinton as First Person is a pretty black mark against those ideals.
Many of us rallied around Bill Clinton and defended him against impeachment. Part of our reasoning was that, although what he did was wrong, it wasn't as bad as Watergate--so he shouldn't suffer the same punishment as Nixon. But allowing him to finish his term was already a compromise with integrity. I'm unhappy about going further than that.
Beyond that personal queasiness is the much more important question about how this affects Hillary Clinton's electability: I genuinely don't understand how the Democrats will respond to this question if Clinton is the nominee. We can't say that Bill's sex was a private matter, because it wasn't only that. There were private aspects, but there were very significant public trust components as well. The repeated lies to the American people--maintaining repeatedly that he did not have an affair with Lewinsky--are especially troubling in terms of public trust.
And we can't say that voters should base their decision on Hillary's record rather than Bill's, because he will in fact be First Person; his record is relevant on this point.
Nor is this an unfair gender-based attack. If Cindy McCain or Michelle Obama had engaged in workplace misconduct, repeatedly lied to the public while holding some public office, and/or lied under oath, I am quite sure that John McCain or Barack Obama would no longer be in the race. And we don't have to accept Bill's faults because it's the only way to get a woman in the White House. There are plenty of talented women holding other political offices who could run for president in 2012 or later.
This issue hurt Al Gore in 2000--his association with the Clinton scandals was a major part of what made that election so close and ultimately threw the White House to Bush. It's now eight years later, so some Democrats may think that the issue has less impact. But Hillary Clinton would actually bring Bill back to a position of public trust in the White House, which raises the issue quite pointedly. And people have become even more fed up with scandals and lying among politicians. I think Republicans and Independents will massacre Clinton on this issue if she's the Democratic nominee, and I don't know what the campaign's answer would be. Is anyone else wondering about this?