Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has returned to Washington and is back to work, presumably hoping to continue working for another year and a half until the end of her sixth term in the US Senate.

Everyone is happy to hear it. She was wheeled into the Capitol last week and, at 89, looking worse for wear and tear, but vowed to resume my duties when she was at a

slightly lighter than normal schedule.

Her future successors weighed in on the weekend. Representatives. Barbara Lee (D-Oakland) and Katie Porter (D-Irvine), who are running in the 2024 election to replace her if she steps down, both said they were glad she was feeling better after her three-month stint with shingles . and they wished her well.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank), the other leading candidate, expressed hope for a speedy recovery so she could return to work.

But what were they actually thinking? I hate being cynical and I don’t claim to be a mind reader, but honestly I find it hard to take what they say about Feinstein for granted.

Sure, they’re probably glad she’s recovering. But what I suspect they care about even more than whether she’s on the mend is how her choices to stay on or step down will affect their upcoming race.

This is the complicated reality behind the feel-good press releases. If Feinstein steps down before the election and that still seems like a very real possibility to me despite her

recent

back to Capitol Hill Gov. Gavin Newsom has the authority to nominate anyone to fill their seat. And Newsom made a fateful promise on MSNBC in 2021, not long after naming a Latino man to the last open seat: He promised that if given the chance to nominate again, he would name a black woman. There are currently no black women serving in the Senate.

Currently, the leading candidates in the race to succeed Feinstein are Porter, Schiff and Lee, two white candidates and one black woman, respectively.

So what happens next can’t possibly be far from their minds.

Will Feinstein serve out her full term or will Newsom be appointed? If so, will he appoint a black woman as promised? If he does, will it be Lee who gives her the huge advantage of incumbency? Or will it be a janitor, who would presumably promise not to run for office and to relinquish the seat after the election.

Lee has strong reason to hope that Feinstein will be fired soon and that Newsom will hire her. That, I suspect, is why Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont), a co-chair of Lee’s election campaign, so quickly called for Feinstein to resign

several weeks ago, saying: It is clear that she can no longer fulfill her duties.

Schiff and Porter, in turn, have good reasons for wanting Feinstein

Unpleasant

go ahead and serve her term. That’s probably why Schiff has publicly pointed out problems with naming a replacement. If Feinstein stays, he noted, she could break the deadlock around Senate judicial nominations

J

board committee, but if she steps aside and Newsom fills the vacancy

hires someone new

,

Republicans would probably stop anyone from replacing her on the committee.

By most accounts, Newsom is not eager to appoint a replacement

.

I hope I never have to make that decision, Newsom said in April when asked if he still intended to hire a black woman

when the Feinstein retired. The chair came free.

And in that regard, I tend to believe him.

If she steps down and he doesn’t nominate a black woman, it would understandably be viewed as a betrayal of African-American voters. But when he mentions Lee, he angers Schiff and Porter and their strong supporters (such as Nancy Pelosi, to whom he is very close).

If he appoints an African American janitor, which is probably his best and safest bet, he will anger Lee and no doubt other African American leaders who will feel it betrays the spirit of his promise. They are looking for a real place at the table, not a temporary caretaker role.

so w

while the glad tidings Feinstein have received from California politicians are not lies, their press releases should be read with a skeptical eye

and a few dozen grains of salt.

Meanwhile, all of this is separate from whether Feinstein

should

resign for the good of the state and its citizens.

There is still pressure

her to resign, especially from progressives who have been dissatisfied with her moderate democratic politics for years.

But even that is complicated.

If, as newspaper reports have suggested, Feinstein exhibits considerable clumsiness, forgets colleagues’ names, and rapidly deteriorates, it’s hard to argue that she should stay. Not only would that be unfair to voters, but it could be difficult for Feinstein herself to survive a year and a half in the public eye without making an embarrassing mistake that tarnishes her legacy.

It is also sad but true that much of a senator’s job can be done by staffers, and that thanks to her 30 years of seniority in the senate, Feinstein wields power and authority that a replacement senator would not have. She is not only on the Judiciary Committee, but also on the powerful Appropriations Committee. Californians would immediately lose influence if she resigned.

And all things are equal

,

it is better for voters to elect their representatives than for governors to elect them.

Feinstein has been adamant that she will serve out her term. If she can do that effectively, great.

May her health continue to improve.

I hope that when she leaves the Senate, her dignity will be intact and her legacy will be safe.

@nick_goldberg