2009: Pick the Next Cabinet
Tue Jul 31, 2007 at 10:40:32 PM PDT
Instead of imagining some of the dire possibilities that could intervene between now and then, let's imagine something more cheerful: the 2008 election goes forward as planned and we win! Imagine you're the new Democratic President taking office in 2009. Now the next question is, who should be in the new cabinet?
In the UK, with its parliamentary system, the parties out of power each have a "Shadow Cabinet" that consists of the people who would most likely get each ministry portfolio if their party took over the government. I've often thought it would be an excellent idea for Presidential nominees to announce their shadow cabinets once they won their party's nomination, since this would give the voters a lot better idea of what to expect from the candidate's administration--realizing that some of them might not ultimately get the job if scandal or health problems or some other factor made them bow out or fail to get Congressional approval. Knowing at least who the candidate preferred for some of the major posts like Secretary of State or Secretary of Defense would help voters gauge how the candidate's government might shape up.
You almost never see radical outsiders picked. Or outsiders of any persuasion for that matter. Sorry, Michael. (And Ralph.) Occasionally an insider goes outside after leaving office (Ramsey Clark or Paul Craig Roberts come to mind), but you have to be inside first in order to be considered.
Historically Presidents seem to appoint one or two close friends or political allies of slightly lesser fame but unquestionable loyalty to cabinet positions that they feel are especially sensitive. Attorney General seems to be a favorite--hence we've had Bobby Kennedy, John Mitchell, Griffin Bell and now Alberto Gonzales. A bad choice for Attorney General (from the perspective of the President's political fortunes, that is) like Janet Reno for Clinton (his own bad choice) or Elliot Richardson for Nixon (more or less forced on him?) can land the President in a world of hurt.
Then there are a number of appointments given out to safe establishment figures whose political pedigree is well known. Clinton had three of these as Treasury Secretaries--Bentsen (good choice) to begin with, followed by Rubin (not so much) and Summers (not so much). Carter had Cyrus Vance as Secretary of State, a classic establishment blueblood.
There are also some people regarded as rising stars in the party who get a crack at cabinet posts, like Henry Cisneros or Elizabeth Dole (yep, she was considered a rising star once upon a time).
I tried to come up with names that I would like to see for 6 cabinet departments: State, Defense, Attorney General, Homeland Security, Treasury, and National Security Advisor. Since we don't know yet who the new Democratic President is, I ruled out all of the candidates now running, plus Al Gore and Wesley Clark, since some of us are hoping one or the other of those two will get into the race. Since we don't know how big the Democratic majorities in Congress will be, I also avoided poaching any current members of Congress to serve in the cabinet.
This is who I came up with:
- State - Joe Wilson
- Defense - Max Cleland
- Attorney General - Elizabeth Holtzman
- Homeland Security - Gary Hart
- Treasury - Joseph Stiglitz
- National Security Advisor - Bob Graham
I can't remember if Joe Wilson is even a Democrat, but he's stood up to Saddam Hussein (in person) and he's stood up to the Bush mafia, so that counts for a lot. State and Treasury are the most likely places to put establishment insiders, which I consider Wilson to be, and the most likely rising stars for State (initials BR & WC) are active or potential candidates now and I already ruled them out. You got it, Joe!
My first thought for Defense was Gary Hart. He may be the best qualified person too, but the situation over at Homeland Security is dire, a dreadful mess that could easily explode on the new President. Max Cleland is the guy I thought Kerry should've picked as his Vice Presidential candidate (heck, if he was going to go with the "reporting for duty" concept he might as well have gone all the way!). It's not certain but it seems all too likely that Cleland may have been robbed in his Senate re-election bid, but he didn't cry about it and went on to serve on the 9/11 Commission (and was outspoken about the problems with that, unlike some the wooden dummies we had in there as placeholder Democrats). He can handle Defense while Gary tries desperately to straighten out the horror-show in Homeland Security before we get attacked again.
Elizabeth Holtzman...didn't she have something to do with Watergate? Well, yes, and ERA, but she has also, since going back to law practice these many years, come out in print with a detailed case for impeaching Bush. She has no soft center of gooey moral relativism where things like torture and spying on patriotic Americans are concerned. She provides a quick antidote to the Addington-Bybee-Gonzales-Yoo creep squad.
Josesph Stiglitz, Nobel prize winner, is also Joseph Stiglitz, former fan of globalization now turned into one of its harsher critics. And no fan of Mr. Greenspan. The financial system has more bodies buried in it than most people know, but he has the insider's knowledge plus a jaundiced eye for the mismatch between the utopian claims for unfettered global capital and the much uglier reality.
Bob Graham, former Senator from Florida, former Presidential candidate in 2004 (I confess: I supported him early on), also served on the Senate Intelligence Committee and conducted an investigation of 9/11 that had a large portion of its findings classified. He definitely knows that 9/11 had a lot more to do with the Saudis and Pakistanis than with anyone in or from Iraq, Syria or Iran. Probably knows where a lot of bodies are buried but is not allowed to say. I don't know who could better advise the new President on national security issues than Bob.
OK, those are my choices, and I only picked 6 positions. Thought about people like RFK, Jr., Scott Ritter and Andrew Bacevich, but figured they didn't have the insider cachet to get past Congress. Do you think other cabinet departments are equally or more important? Who would you name to what post, and why?
Permalink | 45 comments