Hilliam or Billary?

Is it too early to ask that if Hillary Clinton were elected the 44th president would the 42nd actually run the White House and the country?

 

Why has not that question received more attention? Surely it has been asked by some savvy pols, especially Republicans.

 

Back in 1992 the cry of William Jefferson Clinton was that voters would get two for one by electing him, meaning he had a smart wife. Senator Clinton isn’t using that line, although she hints her hubby might very well be more than a First Spouse looking after state dinners and flower arrangements in the executive mansion.

 

Let’s stipulate that there are many Democratic voters who would be most pleased if the Hon. Bill Clinton were more than just the husband of a sitting president. Might not his vast knowledge of statecraft be a boon to the good ol’ US of A? Would not his advice add an extra edge to someone called “the smartest woman in the world”? Perhaps there is some validity in that position. He could, perhaps, stop her from making some move that his experience would find unwise. Are two minds not better than one?

 

Yet, he would have to keep his influence from public view in order to prevent her authority from dilution. Should he be seen as the real power behind the Oval Office it would do her and the country no good. Could he sublimate his influence so that she, not he, would benefit from the synergy of their collective thinking? Would it be collective thinking? How would their occupancy of the White House be perceived by the news media, the pundits and the citizenry at large? How would foreign governments react, having once dealt with another President Clinton?

 

Perhaps any answer – certainly at this stage of the campaign – after she were inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009, would be purely conjectural. Oh, the presidential press secretary would be peppered continually with related questions, but would any answer satisfy the press?

 

Mrs. Clinton’s rivals for the Democratic nomination have not pushed speculation about what role Bill Clinton would play as the president’s husband. The very mention of such an idea would increase her front-running position.

 

Any of the Republicans seeking the nomination might want to save such a stratagem until after the nominating convention. Broaching it too early might backfire.

 

Nonetheless, it seems that the electorate in the caucus and primary states needs to consider whether voting for Hillary Clinton is a vote for one person or two. Is a vote at that stage a vote for Hilliam or, even, Billlary?

 

Should Senator Clinton become President Clinton it might be difficult to know whether there were one chief executive or two. Would the commander-in-chief be commanders in chief? Even if Bill Clinton truly remain in the background and offered no more pertinent advice than an appointed aide would the White House be able to convince the news media and the public of that benign arrangement?

 

Surely these are legitimate questions although the election is 14 months out. Good arguments can be made either way They should be debated.