It may be premature to speculate about running mates for Barack Obama, as he still has crucial contests coming up in Texas and Ohio (not to mention Rhode Island and Vermont) next week.
Still, given the progress Obama has made towards getting the nomination, it's not inappropriate to begin talking about who he might select as his No. 2.
Most of the names bandied about include Sens. Jim Webb, Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Governors Kathleen Sebelius and Tim Kaine. Others (including Howard Fineman and Chris Cilizza) have even mentioned Tom Daschle, who has been a major behind-the-scenes player in the Obama campaign.
But I'd like to propose another name that few have mentioned: Sen. John Francis "Jack" Reed of Rhode Island.
Jack Reed was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996 after three terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, representing Rhode Island's 2nd congressional district. In the Senate, he has been a behind-the-scenes powerhouse. He serves on two major committees, unheard of for someone with his level of seniority: Appropriations and Armed Services. Although he is only the number four Democrat on Armed Services, he is next in line to become chairman of the committee should Carl Levin step down.
Moreover, Reed's knowledge of defense issues isn't merely theoretical. Reed is a graduate of West Point and served for 12 years in the army as a paratrooper and squadron leader. He then served for more than a decade in the Army reserve.
For these reasons, Reed has often been touted as a possible secretary of defense. But his talents could certainly be useful as a vice president and as a running mate.
On other grounds, Reed is a solid liberal who voted NO on the Iraq War Resolution and has been an effective spokesman on that issue and on FISA.
As for his personal biography, he is 59 years old and a graduate of Harvard Law School, where he attended upon being discharged from the army. He married a few years ago and has a young daughter.
What would Reed bring to the ticket? Experience; an earthy, friendly and gaffe-free campaigning manner; excellent debating skills; and foreign policy and defense policy chops that few Democrats can rival.
Many have proposed Sens. Joe Biden or Chris Dodd for Obama's running mate. In my view, Reed brings all the same advantages as either, plus no disadvantages and several major additional benefits.
I'd love to see a debate between John McCain and Jack Reed on Defense policy.
Negatives?
There are a few downsides. This is true with anyone; there is no perfect candidate (for any office).
First, on a superficial note, Reed is very short. Diminutive, really. So he might strike an odd visual contrast with Obama. Such things shouldn't matter, but unfortunately they do factor into calculations. Hopefully something this banal won't wreck Reed's VP chances.
Secondly, he won't swing any red states off the bat. This is a legitimate concern, and Democrats do have some good red-state choices. However, remember that the running mate should not be seen purely as a vessel to swing a state, especially since the running mate rarely DOES flip a state.
The Vice Presidential nominee should help the ticket across the board. First, he or she must do no harm. He or she should also complement the presidential nominee, either by enhancing the existing narrative of the candidate (think Clinton-Gore) or by compensating for perceived weaknesses (think Bush-Cheney). He or she should also be an effective campaign surrogate, which means they should not become "the" story. They shouldn't be loose cannons who can go off-message and they shouldn't be someone who will embarrass the ticket or lose the ticket votes.
Also, in the modern age, they should be someone the presidential nominee is comfortable with. That means that ideologically there shouldn't be significant differences. Ideological ticket-balancing is less important in these days of basically unified parties and when the VP has become an integral part of a president's administration. Moreover, the VP should be someone who is ready to be president should that occur.
On all those grounds, Sen. Reed is a slam-dunk choice. Ignoring his considerable strengths because he comes from the Northeast is foolish. If, on balance, the Obama campaign were to decide that a red state governor or senator is a better pick, that is fine, but the choice better be made by weighing how well the eventual pick satisfies all the other criteria that are important.
One other sticking point for Reed is that he's up for reelection in 2008. What are Rhode Island's laws regarding running for both the Senate and the presidency or vice presidency? Even if it is allowed, it would be preferable for Reed to drop his reelection bid so that RI Democrats could pick another candidate, simply because RI has a Republican governor through 2010 and if he were to resign his Senate seat following a successful reelection, a Republican would probably be named to his seat.
RI Democrats have an embarrassment of riches when it comes to Democratic elected officials who could run if Reed stepped down. For Reed, personally, this would be a risk, because if the ticket loses, he'd be out of a job. Would he be willing to do this?
Still, I hope you'll all join me in recognizing Sen. Reed's considerable accomplishments. And I certainly hope that the Obama campaign, should they prove successful in their drive for the nomination, will give Reed serious consideration.
Media
Here's a video of Sen. Reed harshly questioning Bush's "war czar" and calling for Stephen Hadley (National Security Advisor) to be "fired":
http://thinkprogress.org/...
Here's a video of Sen. Reed rubbishing GOP claims regarding FISA -- and doing an excellent job. Courtesy of Crooks & Liars and CNN's Late Edition:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/...