In 2000, Hillary Clinton was elected to the United States Senate by the citizens of the state of New York.  Arguably her main qualification was her name — she was, of course, the sitting second-term First Lady of the United States; one can't imagine a person born and raised in Illinois and largely making her name as a lawyer in Arkansas being elected to the Senate from New York under normal circumstances.

With Senator Clinton now assuming the title of Secretary-designate of State, New York Governor David Patterson is tasked with naming a new Senator should Sen. Clinton, as expected, be confirmed by the Senate for the cabinet position.  The candidates are lining up, lobbying behind the scenes with Patterson and other "power brokers" and in public via the press.  Some of the names are familiar ones, both in New York politics and nationwide.  Among them:  Andrew Cuomo and Caroline Kennedy.

Cuomo is the son of former NY Gov. Mario Cuomo, perhaps best known for rousing speeches at the Democratic National Convention in 1984 but who famously declined to run for the presidency in 1988 and 1992, much to the chagrin of liberal Democrats.  Andrew Cuomo served in the cabinet of President Clinton as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and is currently the NY Attorney General.  He's been discussed as a potential candidate for NY Governor, following in the footsteps of his father; for this reason, Cuomo could be politically a good choice for Patterson, as it could take a potential opponent out of the way.

Kennedy is, of course, daughter of the former President, and niece to two US Senators:  former NY Senator Robert Kennedy and current Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy.  Her candidacy is based largely on her maiden name:  her political resume prior to 2008 is basically nonexistent.  She has been in the public eye as an author, fundraiser for New York City schools, and the subject of celebrity tabloid-esque stories in magazines like People.  America can never seem to get enough about the Kennedys.

The main criticism about Kennedy's self-induced candidacy seems to be her lack of political experience.  Such a notion presupposes that "experience" in politics is a positive, that it endows a candidate with some sort of expertise.  One should remember that a long record of experience in politics denotes talent at exactly one thing:  getting people to vote for you.  A candidate who wins elections is skilled at winning elections; no particular expertise can be inferred.  Regardless of where one sits on the political ideological spectrum, there are plenty of examples of incompetence available who were especially adept at retaining office.

Moreover, such a criticism implies that holding political office is a benefit to seeking other political office.  I would contend that just the opposite is often the case — that we need more diversity of experience in the government, particularly in terms of the private sector.  Rather than near-lifetime politicians divorced for long periods of time from having to live and work under the laws they've helped create or administer, and many, perhaps most, from a background in the legal profession, wouldn't we be better served by people from a wide swath of society — small business owners, teachers, engineers, accountants, physicians, etc. ?  I would think so.

All that said, I don't particularly like the dynastic sense that pervades American politics.  Our outgoing President is the son of a President, Vice President, and Congressman, grandson of  a Senator, brother of a Governor.  When then-Senator Frank Murkowski was elected Governor of Alaska, he named his daughter to fill out his seat; Vice President-elect Joe Biden's son Beau is mentioned as the likely successor to his own seat; the untimely deaths of Sonny Bono of California and Mel Carnahan of Missouri resulted in their respective widows being named to replace them.  Politics is often a family business, going back to John, Sam, and John Quincy Adams — 2 of whom were elected President.  The Kennedys didn't invent the game, they are just the current (and long-running) favorites.

So it would seem that Caroline has a mark in her favor — diversity of background — to balance her family name.  Of course, the best case scenario in my mind would be for Gov. Patterson to appoint a free market capitalist to the Senate seat (Larry Kudlow comes to mind), but given his past proclivities for interventionist government I'm not holding my breath.  So rather than let the seat be "inherited" by a Kennedy or a Cuomo, or by a career politician of a less patrician surname, I would recommend he appoint someone completely off the radar.  How about a university president, business owner, or corporate CEO (although preferably not of AIG or other beneficiary of "bailout" largess)?  Patterson could surely find someone who represents New York who brings some diversity of background to Congress.