Pedigree or Poverty: Is there a litmus test for US Senate?

Pedigree or Poverty: Is there a litmus test for US Senate?
(Cross posted on Square State)

On Monday, September 7th, Square State blogger “JO” wrote a diary titled, “Michael and Me”, chronicling the rise up the political ladder of US Senator Michael Bennet. In it, JO claimed Michael Bennet's family finances and social connections resulted in his rise to the top. If Michael Bennet got on the faster elevator to the top floor, does that mean he doesn't have a right to be there?

As someone who grew up in a working class, blue collar home from a huge family (not unlike Bill Ritter's or Ken Salazar's childhoods, except my family did not own a ranch), I am also a populist, suspicious of those who rise to the top quickly with help from "Daddy's connections". The possibility someone could become Superintendant of DPS without paying his/her dues as a teacher, disgusts me. If "connections" were involved, it was a slap in the face to hard-working teachers who toil away day after day, year after year, hoping for recognition and promotion. (I cannot speak to the accuracy of that story because I do not have the facts.)

The same argument could me made about Michael Bennet's appointment to the US Senate by Governor Bill Ritter. Bennet's appointment was a slap in the face to Andrew Romanoff, who worked tirelessly as CO Speaker-of-the-House and deserved the promotion. I don't know a single progressive, myself included, who was not surprised and irritated by the pick that first day. Countless blog entries on Square State and elsewhere attest to that fact.

Michael Bennet is now our US Senator, like it or not. The question is no longer, "Should he have been appointed?” the question is, "Should he stay?"

Michael Bennet has positioned himself as a moderate Democrat in a very purple state. That is a wise move. As much as we all respect and admire Andrew Romanoff and his many accomplishments, let's be real. He would not have even the slightest chance of winning the general election in a state with 6-foot privacy fences and an abundance of gun-shops. If you can't see that, go hang out in Elbert or Douglas or Larimer counties for awhile, and count the gun racks and "hippies use side door" signs. If the general election were between Andrew Romanoff and Michael Bennet(hypothetically speaking), Andrew Romanoff would win in Denver and Boulder, and Michael Bennet would win overall.

Aah, but "progressive" Barack Obama won in Colorado, you might point out. Barack Obama had a now-legendary ground game, and followed the worst President in the history of the United States. Barack Obama was in the right place at the right time, and was the right candidate. As my friend Ken Ohmstede recently said, "Andrew Romanoff is the right candidate at the wrong time". I have to agree with him.

Would I rather have a strong progressive as my US Senator? Absolutely! Do I believe one has even tofu's chance of becoming the most popular dish at Stampede? Hell, no.

Michael Bennet has travelled to 64 counties in Colorado, as of today. He started long before he thought he would have a primary challenger, listening to voters, meeting their families and learning about their needs and concerns. He didn't have to do that. He could be hiding somewhere with Mark Udall sipping Celestial Seasonings tea these past six months.

My gut tells me Michael Bennet is sincere in his concern for the well-being of others (all people, not just the wealthy), based on personal conversations and hearing numerous speeches. In his short time as US Senator, he has accomplished a great deal to help people I care about:
* was a cosponsor of the Matthew Shepard Hate Crime Prevention Act;
* was the deciding vote on the Credit Card Holders Bill of Rights;
* supported the Sander's amendment which would have capped credit card rates at 15% (it failed);
* supported Helping Families Save Their Homes Act;
* supported passage of Barack Obama's budget and the Recovery Act;
* supported the confirmation of Justice Sonia Sotomayor;
* voted for a public lands bill to protect national parks and open spaces;
* voted to expand SCHIP;
* voted for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act;
* has been a strong advocate for the public option (especially in contrast to Mark Udall, who must have come out, seen his shadow, and gone back into his hiding hole for six more weeks). This list does not include legislation Senator Bennet has introduced, which has not yet passed.

I am not formally endorsing either candidate, nor should I. The candidate who wins the primary, if there is one, will have my full, unequivocal support. I am trying to make sure the candidate who wins the primary will be tough enough, moderate enough, and respected enough by independents, to take on and win against their Republican challenger, whoever that may be. Losing one of our US Senate seats is not an option. To win in Colorado, all candidates in a statewide race need to win over independents. It's just that simple.

I have some questions for “JO the blogger”: The Kennedys were all children of great privilege who became heroes in modern American history. Can a rich kid ever make "the list of virtue" by his/her actions, or is there some kind of rule against it in the "American Dream Handbook"? As much as I love the almost-too-perfect real-life story of Barack Obama's rags-to-riches journey to the Presidency, is it realistic to expect all of our elected officials to come from poverty? In a democracy, shouldn't the rich be given the same opportunity to prove themselves as the rest of us? If his heart is in the right place, and he has proven himself to lead, does it really matter who his parents were?

Maybe I should ask Jared Polis.