Democratic factions waiting for Feinstein’s big decision
In November, Dianne Feinstein will achieve a milestone of having served precisely a quarter of a century in the U.S. Senate. Next year will mark the 40th anniversary of Feinstein becoming mayor of San Francisco in the wake of the assassinations of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk. She was first elected to public office during Richard Nixon’s first term as president and she graduated from college as Dwight Eisenhower was preparing to run for re-election.
In short, Feinstein has been at this for quite a while.
But there are deep disagreements among California Democrats on whether it’s time for her to move aside to make room for the next generation of leaders, or if her party and her country now need her more than ever. These differences of opinion, though, have less to do with concerns about her age and health and much more to do with varying brands of political philosophy and ideology. Those who are arguing most strongly in favor of her retirement represent the Democrats’ ascendant progressive wing, who are eager to replace her with a much more liberal and more combative successor. Her most ardent defenders, on the other hand, represent the party’s establishment and more moderate members, who believe that there is still a place in Washington for her brand of centrism.
Donald Trump’s presidency has both raised the stakes for her decision and intensified the impatience of those waiting for it. The floor fights and protests at last weekend’s California Democratic convention demonstrated that this party now belongs to Bernie Sanders, 75, much more than to Feinstein, 83. But even though grassroots militants might be ready for her to move on, Democratic leaders understand the valuable role she continues to play in the capitol. As Trump’s presidency lurches further into controversy, Feinstein’s positions on the Senate’s Intelligence and Judiciary committees become of even greater import. And as the possibility of a constitutional crisis appears on the horizon, there is a much greater need for a bipartisan collaborator than an uncompromising ideologue.
The next generation of potential Senate candidates also will wait for Feinstein to decide on her timeline; they have no choice. Leading Democrats such as Rep. Adam Schiff, DBurbank, California Secretary of State Alex Padilla and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti know that if Feinstein does run again, their next opportunity for a top-of-the-ticket statewide campaign won’t come again until 2024.
With Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, state Treasurer John Chiang, former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and former State Superintendent of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin already declared candidates for governor, and billionaire activist Tom Steyer and state Senate President Kevin De León eyeing the race from the sidelines, the Democratic ranks in next year’s campaign are decidedly overpopulated. If Feinstein did not seek re-election, at least some of that group would consider a leap into the Senate race instead of competing in such a crowded field. But they all know the unspoken but unbreakable rule: Any potential candidate who even hints that it’s time for Feinstein to step aside instantly would be branded as disloyal and turned into a political nonfactor.
So the younger Democratic politicians sit and wait, understanding that Feinstein is in no hurry to decide and that there’s nothing they can do to encourage her to get off the fence. At this point in her career, Feinstein can hold that seat for as long as she likes. There is no political force that can pressure her into making that decision before she is ready.
Motivated Millennial activists are not known for their patience, however. In an era when smartphones can provide us with instantaneous information, opinion and entertainment, it seems unreasonable that a grandmother in the U.S. Senate should be able to force us to wait any longer than absolutely necessary before the next campaign can begin.
But from leading San Francisco through the horrific murders of the city’s leaders in the 1970s to breaking the glass ceiling in national politics and government in the 1990s to maintaining a decidedly out-of-fashion approach to policymaking on a contemporary political landscape marked by polarization and hyper-partisanship, this particular grandmother has compiled an extraordinary record of public service over the course of her career. Whether or not one happens to believe that California would benefit from Feinstein serving another six years in office, let us agree that our state’s very senior senator has earned the right to make this decision on her timetable rather than ours.