We need more from you, Senator
Recently, Senator Warren publicly criticized President Obama’s appointment for Treasury Department Position. In a HuffPost Blog titled “Enough is Enough: The President’s Latest Wall Street Nominee,” Warren blasted the appointee, Antonio Weiss, for what she characterized as inadequately experienced for the specific role played by the position he will fill, and his own history of work on corporate inversions while in his current position as the head of global investment banking for the supersize international financial advisory and asset management firm, Lazard.
Some “centrist” liberals (ahem), and Democratic Party establishmentarians have criticized Warren for taking gratuitous shots at a “qualified” candidate at a time when she should be supporting the President, not engaging in an open and unnecessary feud with him. Those criticisms of Warren are foolishly naïve about what’s involved here.
However, real progressives have some reason to also be critical of the otherwise wonderful Senator. Here, I address Senator Warren with my concerns and a few questions:
Dear Senator Elizabeth Warren,
Respectfully, because I and many others strongly agree with your specific objection to this appointment (Antonio Weiss to serve as Under Secretary for Domestic Finance at the Treasury Department) and, more importantly, with your more general frustration at the influence of Wall Street in the Democratic Party (” …the larger, more general issue of Wall Street executives dominating the Obama administration, as well as the Democratic Party’s, overall economic policymaking apparatus”) I feel it is important to ask you directly about your support for Hillary Clinton as our party’s nominee for 2016:
Based on Secretary Clinton’s well-known and documented close political and fundraising ties to Wall Street and her notable lack of significant work on or support for regulation of the financial sector or consumer credit protections, what assures you that a Clinton administration would be any better than the current administration on these sorts of appointments or championing these issues?
We know Ms. Clinton will be a strong advocate on issues of health care, medicare, minimum wage, etc., but on those issues that have to do with your own stance against a system that is, in your words, “rigged” against ordinary, working class people, how would a Clinton candidacy–or Ms Clinton’s leadership of the Democratic Party–address your stated concern that too often of our party has played its own supporting role by failing to “unrig” the system?
Many of us feel that a Clinton candidacy would fail to place these sorts of issues squarely at the center of the campaign or the policy agenda debate of 2016. Are we wrong to be concerned, Senator Warren? If so, how so?
Progressives respect and admire your work and commitment and would appreciate a direct response to our concerns about a Hillary Clinton campaign and presidency.
Thank You,
Mr. Andashes
PS: Keep up your great work!
Back to the Root 