WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush will nominate former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kerik to take over as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, two administration officials said Thursday.
Kerik led the New York City Police Department through the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and their aftermath. He is currently a senior vice president of Giuliani Partners, the consulting firm founded by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who appointed him as commissioner of the NYPD in 2000.
In 2003, Kerik went to Iraq at Bush's request to help train the new Iraqi police force, and he campaigned for Bush's re-election, making at speech at the Republican National Convention in August.
If confirmed by the Senate, Kerik would replace Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, who announced his resignation Tuesday. Ridge said he will remain in the post until February 1 unless a successor is confirmed sooner.
"There will always be more to do, but today, America is significantly stronger and safer than ever before," he said in his resignation letter. (Ridge's letter)
President Bush hailed Ridge's efforts as the nation's first-ever secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, overseeing its 180,000 personnel.
The former two-term governor of Pennsylvania said that, after 22 years in public service, he plans to get more involved in personal and family matters.
Ridge accepted the job of homeland security adviser to Bush just days after the September 11 attacks, and stepped into the job of secretary in January 2003 as 22 government agencies were blended into the Department of Homeland Security. The department was charged with developing and coordinating a national strategy to protect against terrorist threats in the United States.
Perhaps his highest-profile move was to oversee the creation of the color-coded threat-warning system. During his time as adviser and secretary, the national threat level was raised from yellow (elevated) to orange (high) and back six times. It is currently at yellow.
Ridge has won praise for tackling what was widely regarded as an exceedingly difficult job. But many outside observers say the department is falling short of delivering what it should and could.
Some outside analysts also felt that Ridge lost a number of important battles and said they were hoping his replacement would be able to get more money and therefore more clout for the department.
"Tom Ridge is a decent man and a fine public servant but unfortunately was not given the leeway or resources to tighten up homeland security in the way it should be done," said Sen. Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat. "We hope that whoever the administration chooses to succeed him will be given the tools needed to really do the job."
Sen. John Cornyn -- a member of the immigration, border security and citizenship subcommittee -- praised Ridge's performance.
"Tom Ridge has provided strong and resolute leadership in the fight against terror during his service as America's first secretary of homeland security," the Texas Republican said.
And California Rep. Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said Ridge "has made real progress under difficult circumstances."
Ridge served as Pennsylvania governor from 1995 to 2001. He was known for his aggressive technology strategy that helped fuel the state's advances in economic development, education, health and the environment.
The administration has been busy in the weeks since the election, which have also seen the resignations of Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Commerce Secretary Don Evans, Education Secretary Rod Paige, Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman and Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.
So far, Bush has named five replacements. He nominated White House counsel Alberto Gonzales to succeed Ashcroft, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to take over at the State Department, domestic policy adviser Margaret Spellings to replace Paige and Carlos Gutierrez to be the next commerce secretary.
On Thursday, Bush nominated Nebraska Gov. Mike Johanns as his new secretary of agriculture. (Full story)
All of the Cabinet nominees must be confirmed by the Senate
Heavens11 said this in post #5 : [B]..In a surprise move, former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik abruptly withdrew his nomination as President Bush’s choice to be homeland security secretary Friday night, saying questions have arisen about the immigration status of a housekeeper and nanny he employed..
Because there is controversey over whether or not he knowingly hired a nanny who is not legally permitted to work. You've seen what dirt under politicians' nails looks like once it's fully exposed.. just look at the Clinton/Lewinsky/impeachment process. I'm sure he'd just assume skip all that.
If i was a public figure like Bernard Kerik, i wouldnt risk to hire an illegal immigrant.... Since he already withdrawn his candidacy, it means he probably did knowingly hire her in order to save $2 per hour. I wonder if he saved enough money to compensate the loss of such a high-ranked position.
Maybe he did it to save $2/hr. Maybe he did it ot help out a poor lady with whom he empathized and wanted to help out. My guess would be that nine times out of ten, when it comes to people who are financially well off, the latter would be the case. Saving $2/hr is the kind of thing a gas station in Southern California or Arizona would do.
In that case hiring a poor woman without status - although a violation of tax code or employment reg. or whatever - is a morally nice thing to do. I thought people like him should be working for the government.
The legal aspect is the main factor - that's how i see this.
Sean Kelly said this in post #10 : Maybe he did it to save $2/hr. Maybe he did it ot help out a poor lady with whom he empathized and wanted to help out. My guess would be that nine times out of ten, when it comes to people who are financially well off, the latter would be the case. Saving $2/hr is the kind of thing a gas station in Southern California or Arizona would do.
That has to be the most ridiculous thing I have heard. In my experience, the more money a person has, the more frugal they become. I remember when I was living in Sweden, and one of my colleges, who came from a very wealthy family, and was being paid very well, (as we all were, but he more than most, he was taking home around 1500 UKP per day), owned his own home outright, (no mortgage, worth around 3 quarters of a mill pounds), and he absolutely refused to buy drinks on a "rounds" system because my drink cost more than his, meaning he would be down by a couple of pounds when he bought the drinks. In general, poorer people are the ones that contribute far more, (as a percentage of income), on charity, and are the sort of people that give money to homeless people. Rich people are always looking to cut costs wherever possible, and a few bucks an hour cheaper would certainly be preferable.
I must say that whilst being someone who earns a lot more than most, I am different. I tend to throw money away, but that is probably why I am not rich, despite earning a lot, whereas rich people value every penny, which keeps them rich.
12-02-2004 10:50 PM
