About | RSS

TPMDC

Obama Names Top Campaign Bundler To Ambassador Spot

Christina Bellantoni | November 30, 2009, 6:45PM

Spread the word. Share this article on Facebook!

President Barack Obama

2008 campaign, Allan Katz, Ambassadorships, Barack Obama, State Department, White House

Send to a friend!

President Obama tonight named another top donor to a plum diplomatic post.

In an evening release with several other nominations, Obama said he would appoint attorney Allan Katz to be ambassador to Portugal. Like all ambassadorships, it is subject to senate confirmation.

Katz, a former City Commissioner from Tallahassee, Florida, pulled together more than $500,000 in donations to the Obama campaign as one of the Democrat's top "bundlers."

He generated some headlines during the campaign because he was a federally registered lobbyist in 2006. He did not re-register in 2007, however.

In addition to Katz's local government credentials, he served as Legislative Director for Rep. David Obey, and Legislative Assistant to Rep. Bill Gunter.

Obama has rewarded several big donors with top spots, a common practice for presidents. A recent tally by the American Foreign Service Association showed more than half of his nominations so far have been political, and not going to career diplomats.

"As we work to strengthen our relationships in the global community and put our nation back on a path to prosperity, I am confident that these individuals will serve our nation well," Obama said of his nominees tonight.

Here's the full slate of nominations:

Ian C. Kelly, U.S. Representative to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, with the rank of Ambassador, Department of State
Allan J. Katz, Ambassador to the Portuguese Republic, Department of State

Bisa Williams, Ambassador to the Republic of Niger, Department of State

Raul H. Yzaguirre, Sr., Ambassador to the Dominican Republic, Department of State

Patrick K. Nakamura, Member, Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission

Comments (11) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

NuttyProf

November 30, 2009 6:56 PM

ugh. why? why? why?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Why oh why

November 30, 2009 7:34 PM in reply to NuttyProf

Why? See: http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005443

Ambassadorships for Sale

A cynic studying the latest batch of nominees might conclude that the price of an ambassadorship has soared from roughly $200,000 under the Rovian regime to $500,000 under Rahm Emanuel.

or http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/10/hbc-90005971

A Foreign Service Guide to the World’s Hot Spots and Hellholes

What’s notable also is that political appointees tend to get plum positions (think glamorous European capitals and tropical beaches) while career appointees are shuffled off to embassies in the least desirable spots (think war, famine, and general hardship). Consider here the list of appointees to different countries since 1960, as compiled by the American Foreign Service Association.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

midnight rambler

December 1, 2009 2:29 AM in reply to Why oh why

Not really surprising. In tougher countries ambassadors actually have to do work, and likely have to do more to learn the local protocol. In places like Portugal there's less to do, and consequently a crony appointee won't be able to do much damage unless they're grossly incompetent. That's not to say it's a good system, but it's pretty much how it's always been.

Also, consider what one-time ambassador John Kenneth Galbraith said about the job (in the introduction to a book he wrote):

"I am writing it largely to amuse myself and because it is a story I can tell from memory and put down as I travel over India in an airplane, or in odd moments between diplomatic engagements, or while pretending to take notes on long-winded speeches, or to which I can turn my thoughts as I stand in endless reception lines, or as I seem to listen to visitors who have come to pay their respects. This latter compensation I would happily forego. Most people who come to pay their respects to an ambassador wish really to hear themselves talk. I try not to compete with them by listening too."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Why oh why

December 1, 2009 7:08 AM in reply to midnight rambler

Why do you think those rich political appointees prefer to go to rich, safe countries? Do you think they are really eager to attend European cocktail parties, or are they instead thinking of future business opportunities?

How ironic to quote John Kenneth Galbraith here, just a few days after his son was exposed as a crook of the highest caliber who profited immensely from his diplomatic career (in his defense, in a high-risk very-high-reward country, not exactly Portugal):

"After playing a key role in enabling the invasion of Iraq, Galbraith first became one of a handful of U.S. officials who worked on writing the Iraqi Constitution, and after he resigned from the government, he then continuously posed as an independent expert on the region and, specifically, an "unpaid" adviser to the Kurds on the Constitution...

What Galbraith kept completely concealed all these years was that a company he formed in 2004 came to acquire a large stake in a Kurdish oil field whereby, as the NYT put it, he "stands to earn perhaps a hundred million or more dollars." "

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/11/12/galbraith/index.html

But sure, what is the big deal if an US Ambassadorship becomes just a business investment? What could go wrong?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

CVille Dem

November 30, 2009 7:29 PM

Portugal? Why not? The cork trees are picaresque; the sherry is to die for. The sea food is wonderful. Other than that, not much going on.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Bleacher Creature

November 30, 2009 7:48 PM

There is nothing inherently wrong with cronyism or rewarding people who were loyal to your campaign. What is wrong is appointing incompetent cronies to positions that can have an impact on people's lives and well-being (i.e., Michael Brown). There are also many people who get their political appointments because of patronage who are also highly qualified.

As long as we haven't fallen back in time by about 400 years, appointing a former elected official to be Ambassador to Portugal really isn't a big deal.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?