Politico's Manu Raju and Jonathan Martin write:
Republicans in Washington and New Hampshire are mounting a full-court press to keep Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) in the Senate and out of the Obama administration, aides and senators said Friday.
But if he does take the commerce secretary job, they want a commitment that New Hampshire's Democratic governor will appoint a Republican senator so the party holds at least 41 seats, the minimum needed to sustain filibusters. No such commitments have been made, even as Granite State Republican sources tell Politico they are worried Gregg will take the Cabinet job if offered it by Obama.
"I think it would be a loss to the Senate of a great mind and somebody who I think we need a lot as we chart our way through economic challenge," Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), head of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, told Politico on Friday.
Asked what could be offered to keep Gregg in the Senate, Cornyn said: "I would say whatever it is, name it."
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said luring Gregg with a Cabinet job was "sneaky" because it would put the GOP in a bind and take away a valuable member.
Friends tell Politico they expect Gregg to accept the seat if it's offered, even though Gregg has only confirmed he is under consideration and would not comment further. Gregg has to run for reelection next year and could lose in his increasingly Democratic state.
Does it really matter if the Republicans have 41 votes or 40? After all, there are likely to be a number of bad bills on which a few liberal Republicans--Specter, Snowe, Collins--side with the Democrats and render any GOP threat to filibuster moot. Of course, there will be some truly atrocious left-wing measures--card-check, taxpayer-funding of abortions, etc.--where almost every Republican will be willing to filibuster and the GOP has a good chance of plucking off the small number of Democrats needed to thwart the bill. These are the kind of votes where having, or not having, Judd Gregg in the Senate could make all the difference.
