Kerry?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has announced his selections for the debt-reduction panel, and one of these names is not quite like the others. Though he serves on the Senate Finance Committee, Kerry is hardly considered a budget expert along the lines of some of the other Senators rumored to have merited consideration, such as Kent Conrad. Additionally, one of Washington's worst-kept secrets is Senator Kerry's desire to one day serve as Secretary of State; the Obama administration's penchant for employing him as an emissary in Afghanistan suggests he could have that wish granted if the President wins reelection. By accepting this appointment, Senator Kerry can only risk losing stature, and making any potential confirmation process infinitely more difficult if the negotiations become especially embittering.

Despite my initial confusion, though, the logic of Kerry's appointment is surprisingly persuasive when one considers things from the perspective of the democratic leadership. Through his aforementioned work in foreign policy, the Senator seems to have a strong working relationship with the administration; since the President was not afforded any appointments himself under the debt-ceiling deal, it's not actually terribly surprising to see Reid, who has a better working relationship with the President than Pelosi, use one of his picks to give the White House an inside man.

Even more compelling, counterintuitive though it may be, is exactly what stoked my initial skepticism: Kerry is a foreign policy guy, not a budget wonk. The number-crunchers can play all the games they want, but eventually, they are going to have to propose cuts affecting substantive policy abilities. Paul Ryan could be the next Pythagoras, and it wouldn't equip him any better to judge whether an F-22 is a more effective tool for American security than AIDS vaccine funding for African-based NGO's - that's where Kerry comes in. If you expect (as most do) that the Republicans are going to stack their side of the table with numbers guys, Senator Kerry immediately becomes the most credible voice on shaping just which areas of security spending (broadly defined to include State and USAID, on top of DoD) get the axe, helping to subtly advance democratic foreign policy goals through the budgetary process. Even better, by placing a member of the foreign policy establishment on the panel, Reid has ensured that the conversation will be turned to that section of the budget as often as possible, giving the republicans less time to focus on gutting social spending.

This move could well turn out disastrously for Senator Kerry's ambitions; for Senator Reid and the democratic party, though, it was a surprisingly astute move.