Leach, who represented Iowa in Congress for 30 years before a surprising 2006 defeat at the hands of Democrat Dave Loebsack, made headlines in 2008 when he publicly endorsed Obama for president over Republican John McCain. Last November, Leach and former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright served as emissaries for President-elect Obama at the international economic summit. Many believed he would be appointed as ambassador to China, a post that went to Utah Gov. John Huntsman.

“I am confident that with Jim as its head, the National Endowment for the Humanities will continue on its vital mission of supporting the humanities and giving the American public access to the rich resources of our culture,” Obama said in a statement. “Jim is a valued and dedicated public servant and I look forward to working with him in the months and years ahead.”

But the inclusion of Leach, who represented Iowa in congress for 30 years and at one point served as chairman of the House Banking Committee, has caused concern from some on the left. Leach oversaw the deregulation that many blame for today’s financial crisis, critics say, and giving him such a prominent job does not represent a change from the policies of the past.

Linda Thieman at Blog for Iowa puts it this way:

Whereas I am glad that Obama seems to suddenly be remembering to include WOMEN in his all-inclusive team, I’ll admit I about gagged to see that he is asking Iowa’s Jim Leach to represent him at this summit.  Jim Leach?  The guy who chaired the House banking [deregulatory] committee before Iowa citizens ousted him from office?  Come on, Obama.  Give us a break.  I guess that’s Leach’s reward for endorsing Obama once the inevitable became clear.  But as a point in his favor, I guess I can say he’s a far better choice than if Obama had chosen some neocon fox to guard the hen house.

Leach bucked his party to endorse Obama in August, even speaking at the Democratic National Convention. In 1999, he co-sponsored the the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which repealed a Depression-era banking regulation law and paved the way for a number of mergers in the financial industry. Many, including Obama, have said the bill contributed significantly to today’s economic turmoil.

Obama is widely reported to be using Doris Kearns Goodwin’s “Team of Rivals” book on Lincoln as something of a guide when building his cabinet, which is expected to include Republicans and Democrats with points of view that had been at odds with many of his own during the primary and caucuses process.

U.S. News & World Report is one outlet reporting the potential of Leach or Vilsack.

On the one hand, the editorial board compares the freshman Congressman with his veteran predecessor, who Loebsack unseated in 2006:

He doesn’t have the record of bucking his party so dramatically as Leach did over decades. But neither did Leach after only his first term. Loebsack hasn’t yet found an easy balance between his expertise as a political science professor and the partisan, sound-byte communications by which laws are made and votes explained. But it took Leach a long time to earn the right to be longwinded. And Loebsack has yet to earn the powerful committee positions that Leach both gained and lost over the course of his career.

On the other hand, the board defended Loebsack’s two-year record in Congress and criticisms lobbed against him by his critics:

But neither does Loebsack deserve the “Do Nothing Dave” caricature that his critics continue to draw around him. He has been working to ensure that his party leadership and the Bush administration understand how this summer’s floods have been “the most significant natural disaster in memory.” To this end, he has toured the district with national officials and pressed for disaster assistance as his top priority in Congress.

Regarding Loebsack’s opponent, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, the board had praise for her campaign and future in politics, but had some misgivings about her use of ideological rhetoric:

Republican Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ unique background as a soldier and a medical doctor places her in a good position to challenge Loebsack on issues of health care, national defense and economic development. But ironically it’s Miller-Meeks’ discussions of health care — especially her repeated use of loaded language like “Canadian-style socialized medicine” — that comes across as more ideological than experience-based. We think she has a strong future in the Iowa Republican Party, but she hasn’t made the case for why she would be more effective in her first term than Loebsack has been in his.

Former Iowa Republican Congressman Jim Leach (right) speaks with Cedar Rapids businessman Bill Aossey following a Republicans for Obama event Friday morning.It hasn't necessarily been a good week for Republicans.

Despite a rush of Republican pundits to applaud Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s performance in the vice presidential debate, GOP supporters awoke to polls indicating that most uncommitted voters favored Delaware Sen. Joe Biden’s performance.

Nine-term Republican Congressman Wayne Gilchrest told the Washington Post that his own party has “become more narrow, self-serving, more centered around ‘I want, I want, I want’.”

“We’re in this bad place as a country because of the evangelicals, the neocons, the nasty, bitter and mean … very clever ideological groups that use money, technology, fear and bigotry to lead people around,” Gilchrest said. “Voting according to your knowledge and experience — that’s out the window. Competence and prudence? Forget it.”

In Iowa, Republican leaders had the added frustration of watching a man from their side of the political aisle — a man they’d sent to Congress for more than 30 years — host a “Republicans for Obama” event.  Congressman Jim Leach, who served Iowa’s 2nd District until an unexpected 2006 loss to Democratic challenger Dave Loebsack, was introduced at the Obama event by Don Palmer, a Linn County Republican who twice sought election to the Iowa House.

Leach, speaking with Iowa Independent after the event in Cedar Rapids, wasn’t prepared to go quite that far. Leach said that he alone was responsible for the 2006 campaign that ended his career in Congress, but acknowledged that “everyone knows there is a [national] background with which one campaigns.”

“I have to hold myself accountable [for 2006], and would not put that on anyone else,” he said when asked if he felt the climate generated by the current White House administration was partially to blame for his defeat. “In terms of the Republican Party, there have been choices made that are causing the Republican Party to take on a different dimension. There have also been policies made that all governments have to be accountable for.

“Obviously, successful administrations build successful parties while weaker administrations weaken parties. It would be hard to consider this a successful administration at this stage.”

While speaking with those gathered at the event for Obama, the former congressman spoke about his decision to endorse the Democratic nominee for president despite his personal affection for Arizona Sen. John McCain.

“I simply don’t know anyone in the legislature — from either side of the aisle — that isn’t impressed with Barack,” Leach said, adding that Obama has surrounded himself with “good people.” He also said that Obama’s use of “change” — a campaign slogan that Leach believes has become even more relevant as the election season has progressed — has been somewhat distorted.

“What [Obama] is saying is that we will go back to the way things were previously,” he said, noting the recent power-grabs by the Bush administration.

“There are aspects of this administration that are not consistent with American history,” Leach said. “The word that comes to mind is ‘aberration.’”

“ABC, CBS, and NBC did not air any of Leach’s speech, while MSNBC and Fox News aired only seconds of it,” notes Media Matters for America. MSNBC cut away from Leach and instead aired an interview with Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and a panel discussion that degenerated into a shouting match between Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan.

That made for more entertaining television than Leach’s professorial address, but Media Matters says it was unfair compared to the massive play networks gave Georgia Democratic Sen. Zell “Get out of my face!” Miller’s speech endorsing George W. Bush at the 2004 Republican convention.

Of course, Leach didn’t do anything nearly as dramatic as Miller did in challenging MSNBC’s Chris Matthews to a duel. But Media Matters predicts that ex-Democrat Joe Lieberman, speaking next week at the Republican convention, will draw far more attention.

“In troubled times, it was understood that country comes before party,” Leach said after listing several examples of bipartisanship in U.S. history.

Former Rep. Jim Leach addresses the Democratic National Convention (Photo: Flickr/Barack Obama)

“As a Republican, I stand before you with deep respect for the history and traditions of my political party,” Leach said at the beginning of his speech.  “But it is clear to all Americans that something is akilter in our great republic.  In less than a decade, America’s political and economic standings in the world have been diminished.”

Clearly reluctant to throw the crowd the partisan red meat it was accustomed to, Leach maintained a bipartisan attitude throughout his speech.  He cast U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, whom he publicly endorsed two weeks ago, as a “transformative figure,” whose platform is more “change” than “Democratic.”

Leach was introduced to convention-goers by U.S. Sen. Tom Harkin, Iowa’s Democratic senator.  Harkin, who began his speech in sign language, highlighting his support for the Americans with Disabilities Act, called Leach a “strong, proud, influential Republican.”

“You know, we Iowans have a strong, vibrant, two-party political system.  However, we don’t genuflect ideology,” Harkin said.  “We value thoughtfulness.”

If Leach engaged in any genuflection, it was at the altar of bipartisanship, which he got to know well during his long career in Washington, D.C.  To a crowd of rowdy Democrats in Denver, it was not altogether welcome.  Delegates used his speech as an opportunity to talk amongst themselves, which they did during nearly all of the speeches not delivered by a Kennedy or an Obama Monday night.

After comparing the Democratic presidential nominee to former president John F. Kennedy, Leach emphasized the difficulties our next president will face.  “The portfolios of challenges passed on to the next president will be as daunting as any since the Great Depression or World War II.”

“Little is riskier to the national interest than more of the same,” he continued.  “America needs new ideas, new energy, a new generation of leadership.”

“Hence I stand before you,” he concluded, praising both his own party and the party whose delegates he was addressing, “proud of my party’s contributions to America’s history, but, as a citizen, proud as well of the good judgment and good people of this party in nominating a transcendent candidate, who I am convinced will recapture the American dream and be a truly great president.”

“Do we want a new direction rooted in historical American values, or one that might be described as aberrational, that is unusual, in which we attack countries that haven’t attacked us, in which we lay plans for long term occupation of a land where America and the West are deeply resented,” Leach asked. “It’s time for a change and that change needs to come quickly.”

Leach declined to state who Abraham Lincoln would support in this election — yes, Matthews actually asked. “It’s always presumptuous to think of anyone in a historical setting,” Leach said, “but Abraham Lincoln would insist that every American vote for the best candidate irregardless of color of skin. And that is where the great Republican tradition resides.”

Click below to watch the video.

Jim, you were always a modest guy. If Obama’s going to go with a Republican, how about you?

Jim Leach (Oil on canvas, Michael D. Roberts, 2002, Collection of U.S. House of Representatives)

Lord, two years ago I never thought I’d say that.

The most partisan Democrats might scream at the notion of a Republican on the ticket. But Leach, at age 66 on Election Day 2008, would be an unlikely prospect for the White House in 2012 or 2016. And talk about the symbolism. In his pre-Congressional diplomatic career, Leach literally worked side by side with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.

Leach is a far better fit on the issues than Hagel. Chuck Hagel wants to get the war over, true, but on every other issue he’s a Big Red Nebraska conservative. Leach, on the other hand, had a voting record smack dab in the middle of the House during his 30 year career, is acceptable to Democrats on the abortion issue, and represents a moderate Republican breed of cat that has been searching for a home ever since John Anderson left the party in 1980.

Leach is clearly a forgiving fellow, willing to overlook Obama’s last minute campaign stop in Iowa City for Loebsack in 2006 that was literally right outside the door of his congressional office. And after the election, Leach, thinking of continuity and constituent service, turned over the lease on that very office to the Loebsack team. Even the phone number is the same.

Leach has also got a lot of appeal to Democrats. To get really, really micro, he might help in Iowa, which is in the Leaning Obama category but still not 100 percent safe. Leach carried the People’s Republic of Johnson County more often than not during his 30 year tenure, which allowed him to hang on in a Democratic-leaning district until the R label proved to be too much in 2006. In retrospect, it wasn’t a fluke that Dave Loebsack won; rather, it was remarkable that Leach held on as long as he did in such a blue district.

In his 2002 race, Leach signs appeared side by side with Tom Harkin signs in many yards. Leach voted no on the war that October, and while Democrats didn’t want to punish Tom Harkin for voting yes, they wanted to reward Leach. His Democratic opponent, Julie Thomas, was left to say, about a day too late, that she would have voted no too. But an “I woulda” is never as good as an “I did.”

Leach’s campaign style also fits well with many of Obama’s themes. He refused PAC money and ran on an “Integrity” theme. In his last campaign, the Republican Party dropped one negative mailer, complete with the classic ugly distorted picture of the opponent. It made the bearded professor look like Vladimir Ilyich Loebsack. Leach immediately put the kibosh on any more of that. Could he have won if he had gone scorched earth? Maybe. But only at the cost of his whole persona.

And that may be the down side to the Leach for VP boomlet. The running mate traditionally is the attack dog of the ticket, the bad cop of the good cop-bad cop team. That’s a role that ill-suits Leach.

But Obama has talked about putting Republicans in his cabinet, and that seems like a better bet. Leach was mentioned as a possible U.N. ambassador in late 2006, just after his loss, but his war opposition probably ruled out any post in the loyalty über alles Bush administration. That, or another diplomatic job, still sounds like a good job for Leach, who worked at the U.N. back when George H.W. was ambassador and was a high-ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee. A financial post might also be a good fit for the former Banking Committee chair. Maybe Obama needs a Mortgage Crisis Czar.

But if Barack Obama is going to go all-out with his theme of rising above partisanship, Jim Leach is a perfect fit.

“I believe that Jim Leach sees Barack Obama as a candidate who is following in his footsteps, one that is working to change the way business is done in Washington by putting aside party affiliations and ending the era of negative partisan attacks in order to finally address the needs and priorities of hardworking Americans,” said Loebsack. “I know this is what inspired me to support Barack Obama for President.”

Loebsack’s Republican opponent, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, said she had great respect for Leach despite their differences on the presidential race.

“I have tremendous respect and admiration for Jim Leach,” Miller-Meeks told Iowa Independent. “He’s about the most honest and insightful person I know in politics.”

Miller-Meeks restated her support for Republican nominee-to-be John McCain. “You can have a difference of opinion and be allowed to voice that,” she said of Leach’s Obama endorsement. “It doesn’t change the way I feel about (Leach).”

“It’s difficult to know” how Leach’s Obama endorsement will affect her own race, said Miller-Meeks. “It depends on how people percieve Obama and Loebsack.” She said in a down-ballot contest like a congressional race, more voters get to know the candidates as individuals. “There are many of us who vote for people based on their own credentials.”

Loebsack was the first member of Iowa’s congressional delegation to back Obama, and the only one to endorse Obama before the Jan. 3 caucuses.

“Jim Leach has a remarkable career in public service; he has always made it a priority to stay away from divisive party politics,” said Loebsack, who defeated Leach in 2006.