Larry Craig's Dilemma

I have no doubt that many politicians take their role of "public servant" very seriously, but at the same time I think even the most idealistic public servant must also recognize that politics is a career not so unlike other professions. It's no coincidence that Chris Dodd and Mitt Romney followed in their fathers' footsteps by becaming politicians; were they not merely continuing the family business as many children do? Certainly politics is a strange sort of business in that it has a penchant for attracting diverse members of other professions; the presidential race is a good example of this for though the butcher, baker, and candlestick maker have yet to enter the race, the doctor, the lawyer(s), the businessman, the soldier, and the preacher are just a few of the current candidates who are currently seeking the presidency. On the other hand, Larry Craig is an example of a politician who has spent most of his life in politics -- he is a career politician if there ever was one. His name has become associated with scandal and hypocrisy, but the senator from Idaho is ignoring all calls for his resignation and attempting to hold on to his political career for dear life...perhaps, in part, because he has no other career to fall back on.

All things considered, I consider the act which has led to Senator Craig's fall from grace to be, if Craig did indeed commit it, a rather slight offense, though shameful for a married man that publically espouses "family values." Accused of soliciting sex in a public bathroom, Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct but now maintains his innocence and is attempting to withdraw his guilty plea in what will likely be a protracted legal fight. The sordid details of the case have captivated the media's imagination, but frankly solicitations that are much more direct and public occur in bars, clubs, and on college campuses every day. It would seem unfair to me to end someone's career for a single offense of that nature, but this is another example of how politics can differ from other professions. There seems to be no rule as to whether a politician can survive a scandal, no matter how mild or horrendous the offense; some, like Ted Kennedy, have thrived post-scandal while others, like Dan Crane, have been essentially forced to give up politics altogether. It has been hinted in some media reports that Craig will not seek reelection, so perhaps he won't even give the public a chance to reevaluate his character and worth as a candidate...but he still faces a dilemma regarding his immediate future in politics. Members of the Republican Party have called for Craig to resign in light of the scandal, ostensibly for the good of the party; Craig, however, has stated that he would like to complete his term and clear his name, despite having previously announced that he intended to resign in September.

Should Senator Craig stay or go? I think the answer to the question depends on whether we think of Craig as a public servant or as a man. Craig the public servant is clearly hampered by the scandal -- he has shocked constituents and angered colleagues. Even if he does somehow prove himself innocent, his willingness to plead guilty falsely and to change his mind both on his plea and resignation is not likely to impress anyone. Can he effectively serve under these circumstances? On the other hand, the remainder of Craig's present term could be his last moment in the public spotlight; it is likely the last gasp of a long career. No wonder he wants to do everything he can to heal a reputation and secure a legacy. While it would be nice for Craig to put the public interest ahead of his personal interests, it's doubtful that Craig's decision will have any major impact on the nation. So I can't fault him too much for acting as he has, because he is first and foremost a human being...it's just that politics happens to be his career, and that makes everything difficult!