This was scheduled to publish before my profile on Kirsten Gillibrand today. I was away from my laptop and didn’t realize it hadn’t published. So, it’s out of order. Further, I didn’t proofread the Gillibrand profile very well and had to do several edits just now. Apologies to all readers. I will try to do better with future profiles in this series. This one is shorter than Gillibrand’s for the simple reason that Gabbard is younger and, therefore, has had a shorter career/background.
Continuing my weekly series on the 2020 Democratic POTUS candidates, this week I profile the life experience of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI-02), who announced her candidacy on CNN this week. Now, I’m a progressive, and David Nir’s diary gives a good outline as to why progressives will not be enthused about her candidacy. But this series is not about advocating for or against particular candidates. It’s not about “electability” or even about platform positions. That is being done by others. This series looks at the backgrounds of candidates, for life experiences that might be advantageous to their campaigns (connecting to voters) or to their ability to govern. Each Friday, I am posting these profiles in the order of when they announce (or form exploratory committees). The series has already covered Elizabeth Warren, and Julian Castro.
Early Life:
Tulsi Gabbard was born 12 April 1981 in American Samoa, the fourth of five children born to Carol (Porter) and Michael Gabbard. She was born into a multi-ethnic and multi-religious family since her mother is a practicing Hindu of European descent while her father is a mixed-race (Samoan and white) person who is an active and conservative Catholic, but also practices Hindu-influenced meditations. At 16, Tulsi chose Hinduism as her personal faith. (David Nir’s diary, cited above, highlights some of the controversial aspects of this among progressives with Gabbard’s ties to right-wing Hindu fanatics in India.) Here, I would say that this background represents the diversity of the emerging America and could make Gabbard able to connect more to younger voters, but it probably makes it harder for her to connect to Middle American voters and older voters (who vote more).
The Gabbard family moved Hawai’i when Tulsi was 2 years old and her father serves as a member of the Hawai’i state senate as a Democrat. So, Gabbard grew up as part of a political family. But her father’s influence also seems to have impacted her in ways that will not play well in a Democratic primary: For years she was an anti-abortion activist and anti-LGBT activist. Though she has since rejected those stances she learned from her father, the history was long enough and thorough enough that it will make some Democrats wary of her sincerity, now.
With the exception of 2 years in an all-girl missionary school in the Philippines, Gabbard was home-schooled through high school. Although home schooling is now a growing movement beyond the Religious Right (as parents despair over more & more malign neglect of public schools, but cannot afford private ones), I think this early experience will not connect well to most voters. The experience outside the United States could give her a less provincial outlook than many cookie cutter politicians, but early primary voters (especially in IA and NH where retail politics includes small group questions) should press her on the amount and quality of science she received in her home schooling.
Gabbard is well-known to be a good all around athlete, which will certainly be refreshing after the sloth of Trump. But her sports are not very mainstream: She is a martial artist, an avid surfer, and practices yoga. We’re a long way from the jogging routines of presidents Carter & Clinton, never mind the intense weekly basketball games that President Obama used both for general health and to handle the stress of the job. Of course, yoga (both as exercise and spiritual discipline), martial arts, and surfing are far more “mainstream American” in 2018 than they were in my childhood in the 1960s and 1970s, but I question whether or not they will simply serve to underscore Gabbard as “other” to many voters. However, the health and clarity of mind these activities promote could serve her well in governing—at least in contrast to sitting in front of cable news for hours eating fast food.
The last item leads to another difference with Gabbard. As part of her Hinduism she is a vegetarian. Now this is also a growing trend (even Bill Clinton switched to a vegan diet after his bypass surgery) in the country. Further, if a President Gabbard was to push hard on solutions to climate change, her vegetarian lifestyle would give integrity to her efforts, although it would be sure to arouse the ire of ranchers. I do think the White House chefs and kitchen staff would be relieved: Preparing vegetarian meals and even state dinners would have to be preferable to a president addicted to fast food.
Formal Education:
As an educator, I pay close attention to educational background of politicians and candidates. I am biased in favor of smart people who are intellectually curious. I believe this is necessary (though not sufficient) for governing in the 21st C. However, I have been critical of the “Ivy League pipeline” for politicians. This is not out of hostility to the Ivies as such. They are all excellent schools whose reputations are often deserved. But I worry when so many politicians, no matter where in the country they are from, graduate from the same handful of elite universities. It can lead to “group think” that is not helpful.
In this regard, Gabbard once more breaks the “cookie cutter” mold. She earned a B.S. in Business Administration in 2009 from Hawai’i Pacific University. I had never heard of HPU, so I did some research. It’s the largest private, comprehensive university in the central Pacific. It’s a non-sectarian institution, but formed in 1965 from a merger of 2 smaller, private liberal arts colleges—at least one of which was founded as a Christian liberal arts college. It is famous for its Oceanic Institute, but Business Administration is one of its strongest majors.
I must admit to being skeptical of presidents (and candidates) with primarily business backgrounds: Herbert Hoover, George W. Bush, Donald Trump—the record is not good. A government is not a business and the conservative motto of “run the government like a business” is a recipe for disaster. It’s akin to claiming that one wants to run a baseball team like a ballet troupe or run a music conservatory like a genetics laboratory. Anyone claiming such desires would be looked upon as insane. So, I am not comforted by Gabbard’s Business Administration degree. Perhaps if I knew what else she studied, how good a student she was, and how wide ranging her intellectual interests, I would be less skeptical.
Update: This educational background is far from disqualifying. I just would like to know more about it than I easily found with a Google search. Again. it is at least refreshing, that Gabbard is not part of the cookie cutter elite educational background of the typical POTUS candidate.
Military career:
In 2003, while already serving in the Hawai’i state legislature, Gabbard enlisted in the Hawai’i Army National Guard. From 2004-2006 she was on active duty in Iraq, serving in a field medical hospital unit, but not as a medical officer. Upon her return from active duty, Gabbard was on the staff of the late Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) and, while serving as a legislative aide on veterans affairs and national security issues, Gabbard graduated from the Accelerated Officer Candidate School (OCS) of the Alabama Military Academy. Gabbard was the 1st woman to graduate as the distinguished honor student (equivalent to valedictorian) in the Academy’s 50 year history. She was commissioned a 2nd Lt. and assigned back to the 29th Brigade Special Troops Division of the Hawai’i Army National Guard. This time, Gabbard was part of the Military Police, an MP. As an MP Officer, Gabbard has deployed to Kuwait and to Indonesia as part of a training mission with the Indonesian Army. She has quickly risen through the officer ranks and in 2015 was promoted to her current rank of Major.
Pros and cons of this background: Unlike Trump and other chickenhawks, Gabbard has seen (limited) combat duty and more extensive hazardous duty. Military personnel would not be toy soldiers or chess pieces to someone of her background Conceivably, her experience gives her insight into veterans affairs (she has often been endorsed by VoteVets.org) and into national security more broadly. However, in light of this background, her published statements in support of drone strikes and of being conflicted about the use of torture (rather than strongly standing up for the ban against all forms of cruel and inhumane treatment in both international law and the Uniform Code of Military Justice), are even more troubling. It is hard to tell if Gabbard is a hawk or dove. She sometimes seems skeptical of interventionism, but sometimes seems to cozy up to authoritarian types. (Rather than link to these reports, I refer the reader again to David Nir’s diary linked above,)
Update: Ending this section on a positive note: Whatever else one says about the military, they create a “no excuses” culture of doing one’s duty and getting results. That is a welcome contrast to Trump’s “blame everyone but me.” Military service also gets one to care about things beyond narrow self interest. And it exposes a person to fellow soldiers from very different backgrounds. Gabbard cites her military experience as the context for her change of heart on reproductive choice and LGBT rights and I find this very credible.
Political Experience:
For someone only 37 (the Constitution requires that Presidents of the United States be at least 35 at time of inauguration, see Art. II, sec, 5), Gabbard has quickly risen in political experience. She served as a delegate to the Hawai’i House of Representatives from 2002-2006. She was a legislative aide to Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI) from 2007-2011. She was a member of the Honolulu City Council from 2011-2012. When Mazie Hirono resigned as Rep. of Hawai’i’s 2nd U.S. Congressional District to run and win an open U. S. Senate seat, Gabbard ran and won her seat and has been there from 2013 to the present.
Gabbard’s tenure in Congress has been colorful and hard to map, sometimes seeming to be a ConservaDem liked by Trump and even Steve Bannon, but also championing Bernie Sanders’ presidential run in 2016. In her time in Hawai’i city and state politics, she was known to be both anti-LGBT rights and anti-reproductive choice. But, since coming to Congress, Gabbard has gotten 100% positive ratings from both Planned Parenthood and NARAL. Her support for LGBT rights has been hot and cold. She has been a consistent environmentalist and supporter of Medicare for All, but has been lukewarm on gun control.
I continue to be skeptical of her candidacy. Research for this profile has shown me someone who definitely has experience outside the cookie cutter political profile. But I am not convinced that her background easily connects her to most voters or gives her the kind of experience that would make for good governance—especially from a progressive viewpoint.
Readers are free to draw their own conclusions.