Politics tends to run in families. Once a patriarch has established himself in a position of political power, his friends often form a group or faction that tends to self-perpetuate. Other members of the group – often, but not necessarily, relatives – come forward to apply as candidates, and the endeavor continues, sometimes for generations.
American history is full of examples. The Adamses of Massachusetts were among the earliest, and there were many others – the Tafts of Ohio, the Roosevelts of New York, and the Lees of Virginia, to name just three. These recently added the Kennedys of Massachusetts.
The political saga of the Kennedy family began, as such sagas often do, with money. The patriarch, Joseph P. Kennedy, was a businessman – in fact, a bootlegger who made his money from rum during Prohibition. However, subsequent generations of the family showed greater interest in politics. One can only imagine the satisfaction that senior Joe Kennedy must have felt when his son John was elected President of the United States. Since then, the family’s interest in politics has increased even more, and to this day it is challenging to imagine the American political scene without the entire Kennedy family.
So it was nothing novel when the slow Robert Kennedy’s daughter, Caroline, put her name forward as a candidate for the position of secretary of state in the New York Senate vacated by Hillary Clinton. Caroline’s subsequent withdrawal, prompted by questions about her qualifications, does not undermine the most crucial point: Another Kennedy was running for the coveted seat.
You can bet we haven’t heard of the last member of the Kennedy family as a source of talent for Democratic politicians. Nor is it entirely unreasonable that this should be the case. The Kennedy family is now a well-established political brand. The public generally knows what to expect from her. They are Democrats, but not liberal firebrands. Their policies tend to be moderate, as Democrats are these days, and their wealth protects them from the financial temptations that assail so many people who are tempted to throw themselves into “public service.” Not surprisingly, voters tend to feel that when they elect Kennedy to public office, they are choosing a well-known, moderately liberal, and financially incorrupt candidate.
Republicans currently lack comparable alternatives. The Tafts of Ohio come to mind, but no member of that clan is currently seeking national political prominence. There are many popular political candidates in the Republican ranks, but there is no recognized dynasty generating attractive candidates. The one possible exception is the Bush family, which finally boasts two recent presidents and has at least one potentially sizzling figure in its ranks in Texas. However, it is a bit too early to set such expectations very high. We also cannot ignore Ohio, where the Tafts may once again surprise us with one or more captivating possibilities.
Despite all the dangers associated with political “dynasty”, there is much to be said about them. As already mentioned, they give us a comfortable sense of continuity in politics and such desirable qualities as honesty. Occasionally a figure in the clan may go against type (Westbrook Pegler famously called John Roosevelt “the white sheep of the Roosevelt family”), but overall we feel, and rightly so, that we know what to expect from Taft of Ohio or one of Roosevelt Democrats from New York.
So there is something to be said about political dynasties. They give us a sense of security. And if they abuse their power, as political factions often do, they can always be forced out by voters.
