All Blog Posts from Political Hotsheet

One of the stranger aspects of Sarah Palin's announcement Friday that she will resign as governor of Alaska was the notion that it followed naturally from her decision not to seek reelection next year.

The argument goes that executives who can't – or in Palin's case simply choose not to – seek reelection are no longer accountable to their constituents. Their legislative counterparts no longer have to worry about continuing to work with them. So they just amble on, enjoying the fancy dinners and chartered jets that come with their positions, accomplishing little in their waning days in office.

Palin put it this way in her resignation speech:

And so as I thought about this announcement that I wouldn't run for re-election and what it means for Alaska, I thought about how much fun some governors have as lame ducks... travel around the state, to the Lower 48 (maybe), overseas on international trade - as so many politicians do. And then I thought - that's what's wrong - many just accept that lame duck status, hit the road, draw the paycheck, and "milk it". I'm not putting Alaska through that - I promised efficiencies and effectiveness!

She made the same argument in a July 4th Facebook post, saying, "Once I decided not to run for re-election, my decision was that much easier - I've never been one to waste time or resources."

It’s a tough justification to swallow. Are we really to believe that serving out her term would be an automatic waste of time and resources? For one thing, its logical endpoint would be that all presidents should resign as soon as they're elected to a second term, lest they waste America's time with four years of unaccountable lame duck status. Senators and congressmen should resign too as soon as they see retirement or a losing electoral fight on the horizon.

Read full post…