Is the governor's perceived presidential aspirations pure romanticism, or does he have a legitimate shot?

By Jon Gaskell

In the fall of 1991, Des Moines attorney Jerry Crawford received a phone call from Mark Gearan. The two had met during Michael Dukakis' failed presidential bid four or so years earlier with Crawford serving as the Dukakis campaign's chair and Gearan as its senior member. The Democratic Party was floundering the day Gearan picked up the phone to call Crawford, and it was essentially understood that popular New York Gov. Mario Cuomo was going to be the one pulling the party up by its boot straps and challenging incumbent George H.W. Bush for the White House in 1992. Gearan, however, informed Crawford that little-known Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton was pondering a run, as well, and asked Crawford if he would be willing to sit down with Clinton if he flew up to Iowa. Crawford, who had watched Clinton's performance as the keynote speaker at the 1988 Democratic National Convention and deemed it an "unmitigated disaster" and felt, at that time, that Clinton could never be president, said he would.

"So we're sitting there in the Hotel Savery coffee shop," Crawford says, "and person after person is coming up to say 'hello,' and not one of them has any idea who this guy sitting next to me is."

One year later, Bill Clinton was elected President of the United States, going from virtually unknown and seemingly unpolished to leader of the free world.

"He understood the most basic tenet of politics," says Fred Duval, who served as head of Inter Government Affairs in the Clinton White House. "You can't win if you don't play."

Like Clinton, Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack came from a background of less-than-modest means and faced any number of hardships growing up. He was an orphan. His adoptive parents struggled both professionally and personally. Unlike Clinton, though, who felt he was presidential material - even as a teenager - Vilsack did not choose politics so much as politics chose him.

On Dec. 11, 1986, 10 minutes before the expected adjournment of a Mount Pleasant City Council meeting, Ralph Davis, who had been in a feud with city leaders over a backed-up sewer, approached the council's meeting table, pulled out a pistol and murdered Mayor Ed King. Two other council members were gravely injured, as well. The small eastern Iowa town was reeling.

In the wake of the tragic event, Mount Pleasant residents recruited Vilsack to replace King in the hopes that he could help them find solid ground again. Vilsack had married one of the town's sweethearts, Christie Bell, and had joined her father's legal practice in their hometown after completing law school in New York. But while Vilsack had served as president of the Mount Pleasant Rotary Club, the chamber of commerce and had helped raise money for the town's athletic fields, friends and acquaintances say he was anything but a political animal.

Something, however, must have been boiling beneath the surface.
Five years after being tabbed as Mayor of Mount Pleasant, Vilsack was elected to the Iowa State Senate. Six years later, in what some refer to as the biggest upset in this state's political history, Vilsack overcame double-digit deficits in both the primary and the general election to edge out Congressman Jim Ross Lightfoot in a heated race for governor. Vilsack's star has been ascending ever since.

But is it burning bright enough to take him all the way to the highest office in the land - what many suggest to be his likely target? Or is he simply motivated by an idealism that neglects realistic considerations?

"He is absolutely credible as a candidate," says Jack Corrigan, a veteran Massachusetts political operative and one of Sen. John Kerry's top advisers. "The hardcore policy wonks and opinion-makers are extremely impressed with him and intrigued by his success."

Corrigan says that during a Democratic drought, Vilsack kept winning while remaining principled.

"That's not an easy thing to do," Corrigan says. "And he hasn't done anything to diminish his standing."

Furthering the evidence that Vilsack's lofty aspirations are anything but impracticable, experts point out the following: He was nearly the vice presidential candidate of Kerry's on the 2004 Democratic ticket, and figured to be a lock for a top cabinet position had Kerry won; He was the favorite to chair the Democratic National Committee but withdrew his name from consideration in order to concentrate on his final two years as governor; He was named chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council; He established the political action committee Heartland PAC which dumps money into the campaigns of Democratic governors - primarily - nationwide; And in its most recent 2008 Insiders Poll, the National Journal has Vilsack jumping from seventh to fifth place in its list for Democratic Presidential contenders.

"You have to realize," says longtime Des Moines Register political columnist David Yepsen, "that when (Vilsack) goes other places, he gets the same reaction credible candidates who visit here get. Iowans all know him as a former mayor, a state senator and a governor, so you get a lot of people here who say, 'He can't be president,' when in all reality, you do have to treat it seriously."

Yepsen, who has been on his beat for 30 years, says locals rarely ever see their guy as coming out on top and references an Atlanta Constitution Journal headline that, in 1975, read: "Jimmy Carter is Running for What?" Carter, of course, was the governor of Georgia who ended up in the White House after not being taken seriously as a candidate at first - much like Clinton.

Unlike Clinton, though, and Carter for that matter, Vilsack, if he chooses to run, is facing what will likely end up being the deepest and most talented Democratic field ever, with individuals like Sen. Hillary Clinton, Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, Sen. John Kerry and Sen. John Edwards each vying for the top spot. This, according to top party people like Corrigan, is Vilsack's toughest obstacle.

"It is a complicated, crowded media environment," Corrigan says. "And it is a battle to teach people your name. (Vilsack) will always do well with those on top, but that will only take him so far."

Corrigan adds that much of what decides Vilsack's presidential fate - if he decides to run - will be luck.

"Again," Corrigan says, "He is credible. But you also have to be in the right place at the right time."

Dallas billionaire Ross Perot entering the race ended up being a godsend for Clinton in 1992, much like Cuomo's exiting it. And President George H.W. Bush putting his foot in his mouth repeatedly was exceedingly helpful, as well ("Read my lips. No new taxes"). But to say that Clinton was simply lucky in his presidential pursuit would be thoughtless. Right place, right time, obviously. But, as Crawford, says, not only did Clinton want to be president, but he also knew what he would do when he became president.

"Clinton had to prove to the American people that he wasn't the same as the Democrats that they'd been voting against for president," Crawford says. "That he wasn't the same as Michael Dukakis, wasn't the same as Walter Mondale, wasn't the same as Jimmy Carter."

And Clinton did so by promising to end welfare as voters knew it. Taxpayers, Crawford says, knew the system did not work. They resented it mightily and identified its failure with Democrats. Thus, when Clinton introduced his welfare-to-workfare program, voters took notice and immediately cast him as a different kind of Democrat.

"He stood out," Crawford says. "He became presidential."

But does there exist such an issue that could catapult Vilsack into the spotlight so favorably - perhaps ahead of the likes of Hillary Clinton and past Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards? Crawford won't discuss a possible Vilsack presidential run, but Corrigan says Vilsack's gaining steam during an especially tough fiscal time in Iowa and also when the party, nationally, was significantly suffering and being dealt setback after setback could be it.

"He has great political skills and he's an exceptional speaker," Corrigan says. "And when he finds the right audience, he'll be able to talk about the things he's accomplished when others were struggling. That's leadership. That's impressive."
Yepsen, though, doesn't buy it.

"There are no Iowa miracles," Yepsen says. "Great things aren't happening in our state. It's good for some people. But the governor isn't lighting any fires."

And while Crawford points out that some 60 percent of Iowans approve of the job Vilsack is doing, Yepsen says that leaves 40 percent who feel that we're not heading in the right direction.

"Also, he's the education governor, but teacher pay has dropped since he's been in office," Yepsen says, so education can't be the issue that stimulates the Democratic voting populace. Add to it what Yepsen sees as Vilsack's biggest problem - lack of foreign policy and defense experience - and the governor quickly begins to flirt with "also-ran" status before he's even gotten on the stump.

"This isn't Bill Clinton territory anymore," Yepsen says. "The issues have changed since 9/11, and they are no longer domestic ones - the issues that governors have been so good at dealing with, the ones that enabled a guy like Bill Clinton to win."

However, Duval, whose job in the Clinton White House centered on maintaining the president's relationship with the governors of all 50 states, says that is exactly why Vilsack or Virginia Gov. Mark Warner could capture the nomination. They are excellent managers at a time when Washington is desperate for one.

"If ever there was a moment when Washington was held in low regard, it's right now," Duval says.

And while Duval thinks the largest strategic hurdle for possible candidates like Vilsack is Hillary Clinton's perceived dominance of any race, the senator from New York can be positioned as being part of the problem - as can Kerry and Edwards. Vilsack, though, can position himself as an outsider who is the solution.

"Is he an agent of change for Washington? He has to be," Duval says. "History has shown that governors do well in presidential elections because they are not Washington insiders. And when it comes to our nation's governors, (Vilsack) is among the cream of the crop."

U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin takes it a step further.

"I've seen them all going back to '72," Harkin says of presidents and presidential candidates. "and Gov. Vilsack measures up as well as anyone who has not only run but as well as anyone who has won."

Harkin feels that Vilsack has a "sense of community" that is sorely lacking in the nation's capital these days. Experience in Washington, the senator says, is fundamentally overrated, stating that the war in Iraq and organized corruption in the D.C. power structure - while hopefully events of the past - will likely still be fresh in the minds of voters who will be looking for "honest, proven leadership" in the years to come.

"Gov. Vilsack was a mayor, a state senator, a governor," Harkin says. "People can relate to that, and I really feel that gives him a leg up" on the insiders also mentioned as possible candidates.

Whether simply being anti-Washington will be enough in these post-9/11 times, though, is the million-dollar question, according to Arthur Sanders, professor and chairman of the Politics and International Relations Department at Drake University.

"Obviously it all depends on who actually ends up in the race," Sanders says. "But running against Washington is always a good thing. Can it overshadow (Vilsack's) lack of foreign policy experience and be seen as a positive, this assertion that you can fix Washington because you've never been there? The answer that American voters come up with for that question will decide how (Vilsack) will eventually fare."

In order to be a legitimate "outsider," though, experts say Vilsack will need to take care of business at home during this, his final legislative session. Crawford calls it "tending to one's knitting." Yepsen calls it "a political Hail Mary." Cullen Sheehan, executive director of the Republican Party of Iowa, calls it "unlikely."

"His biggest obstacle is that he lacks focus," Sheehan says of Vilsack. "His attention, I think, is in 49 other states." That alone, according to Sheehan, will go a long way toward tarnishing Vilsack's reputation nationally as a manager.

"It's a noble goal," Sheehan says of Vilsack's perceived presidential aspirations, "but you have to be realistic. We need education reform from our education governor, not just someone who will throw money at it. We need a leader who will work with all legislators for the good of all our people... To that extent, I would argue that he hasn't been overly successful.

"There are ways to get noticed and ways to be taken seriously that would be beneficial to Iowans, as well, and the governor has not demonstrated he is capable of doing it all," Sheehan says.

But being governor is extremely difficult, Crawford points out, anywhere.

"Vilsack faced declining state revenues a number of years in a row after becoming governor, and we have fewer state employees than we did when he took office," he says. "You get bumps and bruises along the way. The key is surviving them."

Crawford says that anyone who watched Vilsack's recent Condition of the State speech saw a person who is extremely focused on his work in Iowa, as well as someone who has grown somewhat implausibly over the course of the past seven years.

However, along with problems with the state's educational system, Vilsack is - fairly or not - tied to Iowa's extremely low growth of personal income, a stagnant population, the raiding of "rainy day" resources that put the state in a hole, economic development programs that have been called "corporate slush funds," an English-Only fiasco that scarred his relationship with immigrants he had tirelessly been wooing, and a host of other issues that Republicans here and Democrats who might take him on nationally will only be more than happy to introduce into the debate.

"You have to be able to establish priorities and you have to be able to say 'no,'" Crawford says, maintaining that any governor who does so will not find an easy go of it. "That's what people expect of a leader. You don't get to a position where you command that much respect in your state by spending your time attending fish suppers in New Hampshire."

To say that Vilsack is not focused, adds Gordon Fischer, an attorney who served as the former chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, borders on nonsensical.

"Do I agree with everything the governor does? No," says Fischer. "But break down the things he has accomplished with education, healthcare and economic growth, and in a politically competitive state that has had wide Republican influence during his terms, and no one could argue that he's been out cutting ribbons."

The political graveyard is filled with the bodies of countless folks who have looked too far down the road. Former Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes was elected to that post in 1998. And in 2002, when Republican Sonny Perdue beat him (to become that state's first Republican governor since Reconstruction) Barnes had some $9 million in unused campaign funds in the bank. Why? He was saving it for his run for president.

"The governor is not going to make that mistake," Fischer says. "He has a full plate. He actually has two full plates and he has one final session to change things.
"The state is at a crossroad," Fischer goes on. "To think about 2008 with the enormous challenges ahead of him would be silly. And he won't. There are lots of things to do at once, and he's going to have a difficult time doing them."

Fischer says he takes Vilsack at his word that he has neither ruled in or out the possibility of running for president, but says if the governor were to run he would be an attractive candidate.

"His name hasn't surfaced so often and he wasn't a finalist as a vice presidential candidate because he isn't up to the task," Fischer says. "But I think that it's a bridge too far. There's too much to do. It's too early."

Not for speculation.

Oddschecker.com - in association with sportinglife.com - currently has Vilsack at 9-1 in its U.S. Democratic Presidential Candidate odds, and Vilsack is gaining ground.

"Is he the strongest guy in the field? No," says Sanders. "But history shows us that candidates in similar positions have fared well. You just can't count him out."

In fact, one could argue that he should be counted among the possible leaders of the pack. With plenty of time to get known, travel the world and brush up on foreign policy (Vilsack, nearly everyone agrees, is a quick-studying policy wonk who would much rather be leafing through reports on early childhood development than doing anything ceremonial), and with no ties to Washington at a time when folks from coast to coast are death on Washington, those in the know say a Vilsack presidency appears to be more than simple romanticism.

"We assume that things don't evolve," Crawford says. "That Bill Clinton was always this gifted communicator because that's how he left office. But he had to grow. There were some bad days."

Adds Duval about Clinton, "You never know who the right person was or what the right plan was until retrospect. It's never clear until then. And that's why 10 people woke up this morning thinking that now is their time, and all 10 of them can give you any number of convincing reasons why."

Duval says that the worst thing people can say about Vilsack is that he doesn't have foreign policy experience and that he doesn't know his way around Washington.
"But that's his opportunity," Duval says. "He doesn't."

Whether that ends up being enough, however, depends on where we, as a nation, are a few years from now.

"If I were advising him, and if he were to run," Fischer says, "I would tell him that the best way to stand out in 2008 is to do a good job in 2006. Elections aren't won in election years. And with an unbelievably unpopular Congress and president, and with numbers there possibly sinking even lower, an outsider could make the most sense."
Absolute sense, says Harkin.

"And he has more experience than Carter, Reagan or the first George Bush," Harkin says.

The senator returns to the topic of Iraq and how the American people feel "misled" by what has developed.

"It's not going to go away," he says, adding that in times like these voters tend to look in more unconventional places for leadership.

But Iowa's governor?

Wet, sloppy kisses from party folks aside, Yepsen points out that if Vilsack ever does get serious about a presidential run, the road will be obviously much more difficult than overcoming a double-digit primary deficit to Mark McCormick. Yepsen also says that Vilsack has no "star power" yet - a must - and is in a no-win situation regarding the Iowa Caucuses. Like Harkin, who ran for the Democratic Party's nomination in 1992 and garnered 78 percent of the vote here at home before fizzling in New Hampshire, a victory for Vilsack in Iowa only counts if everyone shows up; and if everyone shows up, a win for Vilsack won't be the uncontested lay-up Harkin had against what was, at the time, a weak field - Clinton, Paul Tsongas, Bob Kerrey - anyway.

"On the plus side," Yepsen says, "the governor is an eloquent guy who can keep people in their seats. He doesn't have a problem with his zipper. And you can get charisma overnight with a decent showing anywhere but Iowa." (Said George McGovern once, "I'll get charisma after I win a primary.")

Not to mention, party people are in love with Vilsack's wife, Christie, who, experts say is not only attractive, a good speaker and a good money raiser, but has great political instincts herself and could likely shake things up if she were to ever decide she wanted a top post.

Yepsen thinks, "absolutely Vilsack is running," asking, essentially, "what has he got to lose?"

"Look at it this way, most people who run for president and lose still end up bettering their lives with a college presidency, higher lecture fees, cabinet posts, whatever," Yepsen says. "And who knows? Maybe lightening will strike. Odds are it won't, but if you're Tom Vilsack, and the White House is open, you have to take a shot. Maybe he'll end up balancing a ticket."

And maybe, somewhere down the road 15 or 20 years from now, a guy will be telling a story about sitting in a coffee shop with this guy from Iowa in 2007 who nobody knew, and a year later... CV

Comment on this story | Return to top