I’m amused by the notion that Elizabeth Warren’s potential nomination for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has “achieved a level of symbolism on the left that’s out of proportion to the merits of the different candidates.” First, there’s nothing symbolic about what we know Warren would try to accomplish. But also, what do people think politics is? Symbolism matters. Making people feel like part of a coalition matters. If the Administration can accomplish this through a Warren appointment and sustained activity toward confirmation on her behalf (and there’s a path available for that, just like the path available for the Wall Street reform bill at the outset), without any loss in competency or management skill or content of the agency (in fact, a likely boost on all fronts), they are making a symbolic statement if they choose NOT to select her. People who identify with a particular political ideology like it when the leaders they vote for manage to acknowledge it. Given the strain in that relationship at present, it makes no sense to reject someone even the major players all agree is exceptionally well-qualified to run the agency she literally invented.

And that’s driving some of the activity in Congress around the Warren nomination. Carolyn Maloney circulated her letter on Warren’s behalf in the House starting Friday, and already she has 15 co-signers, including Financial Services Committee chair Barney Frank and conference committee members Luis Gutierrez and endangered freshman Dem Mary Jo Kilroy.

On the Senate side, Tom Harkin has his own letter he’s drafting to the President, and he continues to get signatures.

CREDO Mobile is engaged in a whip operation with the entire House Democratic Caucus, gauging support for Warren.

There’s nothing out of proportion about this. I know it makes DC liberals all squishy, but outside activism has improved this country tremendously over the decades, and it should be celebrated, not dismissed as “out of proportion.”