By The Time We Get To Arizona: Jindal Makes the Short List

I believe I was among the first bloggers to throw out the name Bobby Jindal as a possible running mate for John McCain — I made the speculation back in February, not too long after McCain emerged as the front-runner in the Republican primaries. At the time it seemed a bit out there, even to me, and there was never any indication from anyone close to McCain that Jindal was on their list. Still, the story kept floating around, and now it seems to have moved to the next level.

For the first time, there are signs that Jindal is being considered among a very short list of possible running mates by the McCain camp:

Senator John McCain is planning to meet this weekend with at least three potential Republican running mates at a gathering at his ranch in Arizona, suggesting that he is stepping up his search for a vice president now that the Democratic contest appears basically decided, according to Republicans familiar with Mr. McCain’s plans.

Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts and a one-time rival for the Republican nomination, have all accepted invitations to visit with Mr. McCain at his ranch in Sedona, these Republicans said. (link)

A couple of other names are also mentioned by the New York Times article, including Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, and Bob Portman. Lindsay Graham will also be invited to the “Veep Vet” party in Sedona, though thus far it appears he’s going as a close friend of McCain’s, rather than as a potential VP.

Given all that competition, it still seems unlikely that Jindal would be chosen. The strongest reason I was able to come up with before was a presumed Republican anxiety about a game-changing, mass-movement emerging around Obama. And while that has happened to some extent, it’s also become clear that there are limits to its reach (i.e., Appalachia). So the idea of off-setting a minority Democratic candidate with a minority Republican Vice-Presidential candidate is probably seeming less urgent now.

Still, perhaps we’re due to have our first Punjabi Vice President.

157 thoughts on “By The Time We Get To Arizona: Jindal Makes the Short List

  1. 148 · rob said

    Insurance against catastrophic illness is a good idea, yes. The question is how it’s provided–markets or gov’t.

    Here’s the thing though, why should someone had to pay high insurance for say, a genetic predisposition (e.g. for breast cancer, family history increases the risk)? How about if no insurance company wants to provide insurance against certain diseases?

    There are certain places where insurance companies refuse to insure houses against earthquake damage. They think the earthquake hazard is just too high for them to make any profit. People have a choice of risking the damage and moving from that place. How about this happens to health? Illness doesn’t stop just because it is too risky for insurance companies.

  2. Here’s the thing though, why should someone had to pay high insurance for say, a genetic predisposition

    You can have some “social insurance” w/out the gov’t taking over the whole health-care sector, which is significant part of the US economy. The question of how much other people should pay for some people’s “genetic predisposition,” is, well, a central topic in political philosophy, with a number of plausible yet incompatible answers. At any rate, it doesn’t run in any unidirectional manner in favor of gov’t healthcare, although that is admittedly one plausible option.

  3. 151 · Violet_in_Twilight said

    148 · rob said
    Insurance against catastrophic illness is a good idea, yes. The question is how it’s provided–markets or gov’t.
    Here’s the thing though, why should someone had to pay high insurance for say, a genetic predisposition (e.g. for breast cancer, family history increases the risk)? How about if no insurance company wants to provide insurance against certain diseases? There are certain places where insurance companies refuse to insure houses against earthquake damage. They think the earthquake hazard is just too high for them to make any profit. People have a choice of risking the damage and moving from that place. How about this happens to health? Illness doesn’t stop just because it is too risky for insurance companies.

    We need to have the private sector help out more. I would hate to see the government get in more debt (after the burdens of Medicare, Medicaid, etc). The private sector came to the rescue during Katrina (the likes of FEMA & such). Nationalized healthcare seems like a good idea, but who’s going to pay for it. Simple way to decrease costs: buying insurance across state lines. (2) eliminate bureaucratic costs (caused by government officials), which inflate the price of healthcare.

  4. I have friends that I have know since high school that live in Holland, Denmark and Sweden. And all them have told me that same story about people in those countries are fed up with the muslim immigrants and there hate for the countries that they live in. My friend in Holland is moving back here to Canada, due to that fact that Amsterdam has he said is turning into a hellhole due the high Muslim population.

    I’m not questioning that there is anti-immigrant sentiment. If you read my statement, it was that despite this sentiment, immigrant populations and nonwhite populations are still EXTREMELY small relative to the native and white populations, and that nativist and anti-Muslim sentiment are not always the direct result of immigration in and of itself, but rather of complex factors that are impacted by immigration. In the UK in the 70s, this hatred was directed towards ALL South Asians, and disproportionately (probably b/c of their disproportionately larger share of the migrant population) towards Sikhs. Today it is Muslims. My point was that it is a knee-jerk reaction to blame immigration policy and argue for closed borders.

  5. 152 · rob said

    The question of how much other people should pay for some people’s “genetic predisposition,” is, well, a central topic in political philosophy, with a number of plausible yet incompatible answers.

    I know what you mean here. I think it depends on ratio of “some people” to “all people” and each person’s definition of their utility curve. I guess my question is not “how much would I pay for some people?” it is more of “how much I am willing to pay to save myself from x% chance of this?”. Universal health care would mean I pay when I can and don’t when I can’t without increasing my total risk. Moreover, I can transfer total risk. Private insurance only allows the transfer of risk that gives profits.

    There could be perfectly rational arguments on why national level health care may not be feasible for U.S. But, that doesn’t take away from my bafflement about why people, who depend on their health to do a job, don’t think in terms of their own risk mitigation.

  6. I’m not questioning that there is anti-immigrant sentiment. If you read my statement, it was that despite this sentiment, immigrant populations and nonwhite populations are still EXTREMELY small relative to the native and white populations, and that nativist and anti-Muslim sentiment are not always the direct result of immigration in and of itself, but rather of complex factors that are impacted by immigration. In the UK in the 70s, this hatred was directed towards ALL South Asians, and disproportionately (probably b/c of their disproportionately larger share of the migrant population) towards Sikhs. Today it is Muslims. My point was that it is a knee-jerk reaction to blame immigration policy and argue for closed borders.

    But thing’s in Europe have changed since the 70′s. There are many European Muslims who have anti-west beliefs and are very open about it. You have mosque that preach hatered for the west and leaders in the community speaking about how islam is gonna take over Europe and some have even called for violence against non-believers.

    The bombings in Spain, and England, the murder of Van Gogh and several riots. In some parts of Europe muslim make up a large % of the rapists despite being a very small % of the population.

    Could you image any where else in the world if groups of immigrants were causing problems like this, what would happen to the minority group.