Opinion

Another ‘job offer’

After first stonewalling, the White House yester day confirmed that it tried to lure Andrew Romanoff out of the Colorado Senate primary with an administration job, to help its preferred candidate, incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet.

Sound familiar?

The Denver Post ran a story on the rumored job offer last September — but White House spokesman Adam Abrams said then, “Romanoff was never offered a position within the administration.”

Under the Bill Clinton standard, that’s true: There was no formal “offer.” But Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina’s e-mail outlined in great specificity three government jobs that happened to be open, should Romanoff (who’d previously been denied an administration job) decide not to run.

The White House’s reasoning is migraine-inducing: It insists it didn’t offer a job — but also that the president has an interest in influencing party primaries. But if the president wasn’t offering a job, then what was he doing to prevent a primary contest?

He was offering a job. Stop insulting our intelligence.

But that’s not the worst. To justify the presidential interest in influencing party primaries, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs yesterday noted, “We went through a contested primary, and they aren’t fun things.” Huh?

By that logic, Obama should have been pushed out of the 2008 primaries to avoid a contentious fight and give the establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton, a walk to the nomination. At the outset, she was by far the favored candidate.

Does the White House not see the irony in trying to entice two insurgents (Romanoff and Pennsylvania’s Joe Sestak) out of challenging the establishment choice?

Many Beltway talkers are claiming that the president actually has the “right,” as head of the party, to clear the field in primaries. Sorry, the only people with the right to choose a nominee are primary voters. We live in the United States, not some Middle Eastern dictatorship (or, apparently, Chicago).

When I voted for Obama, I voted for him to be president, not for him to use government jobs or perks to drive out qualified challengers in Democratic primaries.

It’s maddening to hear the claim that a president has a “right” to use taxpayer-funded jobs (or even an advisory-board post) to consolidate his political power. One of the most frustrating problems in American politics is the power of incumbency, which leaves our government a sewer of career politicians who are nearly impossible to depose once they get elected.

What the president has a “right” to do is to use his own time to help a candidate raise money or campaign. He has no right whatsoever to dole out to his cronies jobs that American taxpayers expect to be filled with qualified candidates.

Then there’s the blather that voters don’t care about this stuff or actually expect the president to behave this way.

Wrong again. In the last year, we’ve seen revolts against backroom deals over health reform (anger that may have been the final straw in electing Sen. Scott Brown). Here in New York, Democrats revolted when the White House tried to pressure Gov. Paterson from running to keep his job. Yes, Paterson later dropped out on his own — but the Marist poll found 62 percent of voters and 51 percent of Democrats saying the administration should butt out.

Indeed, the recent revelations raise the question of just what offers the White House made to clear the way for Andrew Cuomo — and for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Here’s an idea for the Obama White House: Stop meddling. You do your job, and let the American voters do theirs. kirstenpowers@aol.com