George Harris K.C. Star Reader Advisory Panel 2008

Maybe my problem is envy, but I wish governors wouldn’t appoint people to high office because they come from well connected and famous families.

For that matter, I wish we wouldn’t elect so many people who happen to come from the American version of royalty. For example, Hillary Clinton has many strengths, but would she have been successful in her bid for a Senate seat in New York if she hadn’t carried the Clinton fame won by her husband? Doubtful. And don’t get me started about the Bush dynasty.

Caroline Kennedy seems like a fine person. She is an attorney. She has written some books. And no doubt, there are real advantages that the Kennedy name would create for Caroline in the Senate. Don’t you think her call would be returned quicker than the call of, say, Senator Tester?

But most of us start at the bottom of our businesses and professions and work our way up. Politicians usually run for city council or serve in the state legislature and then run for Congress or the Senate. We would all like to start at the top, but there is, in fact, value in learning the ropes first.

There is a tradition of appointing or electing spouses of officials who die in office to fill out the remaining term. After being appointed to complete her husband’s term, Jeane Carnahan didn’t win the election to begin her own term in the Senate. But Mary Bono won a special election in California to complete the term of her deceased husband, Sonny Bono of Sonny and Cher fame, and won subsequent elections to continue in Congress.

So filling out the term of one’s spouse, whether by appointment or election, doesn’t guarantee continued success, though it surely does increase the chances for success in future elections.

But wouldn’t we be better off if we sought out leaders based on their own merits without the advantage of a famous name? Isn't that more consistent with the concept of democracy?