Now that I have clarified why we, or at least I, have focused on personnel instead of policy here at Open Left, let me clarify where I stand on Obama's senior personnel moves during the transition. Although I have been stereotyped by both the establishment media and by many blog commenters as a simplistic one-note progressive who supposedly dislikes everything Obama has done during the transition, my writing shows that this simply is not the case. In the extended entry, using my past writing on the subject, I place my opinion on all major Democratic personnel moves since November 4th into for categories: what I am excited about, what makes me cautiously optimistic, what leaves me wary, and what I actively dislike. Hopefully, it will help bring an end to certain arguments that have become increasingly irritating in their vagueness and generality.
Good stuff in happening in the House, which controls the purse strings for the federal government. I find that very exciting.
Eric Shinseki, Veteran's Affairs. I wish he had an even larger role than Veteran's Affairs, but I am still excited that he was given a cabinet-level appointment. As I wrote on Sunday, those who were right about the most important decisions facing our country should be rewarded.
Cautiously Optimistic
Xavier Bacerra, U.S. Trade Representative. I really like Bacerra as U.S. Trade Reprentative. The reason I put this in "cautiously optimistic" is because he would have to resign his House leadership position. Of course, if someone else as good were to take that position, then this would be a development that excites me quite a bit.
Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State: Foreign policy has never been Clinton's most progressive area, despite a reasonably progressive policy array and voting record elsewhere. Still, I think she is absolutely deserving of a very high place in Obama's administration, given how close she came to the nomination. This is a strong, intra-coalition building move. I'm pretty optimistic on this one, even if it might be a gut feeling more than something supported by details and facts.
It should be noted that Tom Daschle might (I re-emphasize might) be in the opposite situation as Hillary Clinton, in that he will be overseeing a policy area where he actually is progressive, even though his overall record is not. I have also heard from sources that I trust that Daschle, unlike Harry Reid, regularly encouraged the Democratic Senate caucus to take a more progressive approach. I didn't hear any examples, and I am just repeating what I have heard. So, maybe Daschle will be alright. I have a wait and see attitude on his tenure.
Even though I am wary of mandates, I am not a single-payer die hard, either. Health insurance is not an abstract concern for me or my family, and I am cautiously optimistic we will have an easier time scoring some with the work that Daschle will put in.
Raul Grijalva, Sectary of the Interior: Grijalva appears to be the frontrunner for Secretary of the Interior. He isn't a lock, but he seems like he would be a good pick given the legislation he has sponsored. I don't really know much on this one, but what I have seen makes me optimistic.
Sadly, I've been assured by "connected" folks that the job is almost certainly going to Mike Thompson. Do what you can to prevent this blue dog Democrat from getting this position! He voted FOR Bush's Healthy Forests crap, against roadless areas in Tongess, against limiting bear baiting, against limiting roads, against funding fish/wildlife. He's really really bad.
Disappointing.
Eric Holder, Attorney General: Holder helped found the American Constitution Society, which makes him a real progressive organizer in the field he will be overseeing. This could turn into a very good pick. Still, there are some worrying signs, like representing Chiquita in a dispute with the Justice Department over funding right-wing paramilitary groups in Columbia. So, he could be very good, but there are some worrying signs.
Senior White House Staff: There are a number of progressives among Obama's senior White House staff. It isn't dominated by the left, but the left will have a number of strong voices. This is an area where I think the left will be represented in most major policy discussions. No guarantee we will win those discussions, but at least we will be represented. So, I'm cautiously optimistic. In fact, despite my early misgivings on Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff, the developments in the U.S. House since his departure leave me open to the move being a net positive.
Jim Jones, National Security Advisor: Jones supported McCain this year, which is enough to make me wary about him. Matt makes the rest of the case here.
Janet Napolitano, Homeland Security: Matt seems excited about Napolitano, but I'm not. For one thing, and this may seem petty but it really isn't, a Republican will become Governor of Arizona because Napolitano is heading up Homeland Security. That sucks. Also, in March of 2007, when Democrats in Congress were trying to end the Iraq war, Janet Napolitano was palling around with Robert Gates in Iraq and saying "I do think we shouldn't exit precipitously without giving this one more shot," effectively supporting troop escalation and opposing withdrawal. So no, I'm not very excited about Napolitano being among Obama's senior national security leadership.
Impending Secretary of Agriculture pick: There was never too much hope for this position, as Democratic agriculture policy has long been in the hands of rural Blue Dogs. Tom Harkin or Steve Kagen would have been great, but they were always longshots and, after bitter re-election fights, might want to stay in Congress anyway. Still, when I find myself wishing that Bush Dog Stephanie Herseth Sandlin or former DLC chair Tom Vilsack was going to become Secretary of Agriculture, then you know the other nominees are weak. Orangecloud115 offers a strong breakdown of this issue.
Mike Hayden, CIA Director: Speaking of FISA, keeping Mike Hayden on as Director of the CIA would signal Obama has no intention of revisiting the issue, and really has gone right-wing on this one. It is still just speculation, and not confirmed, but if it happens, this one would really suck. Keeping Bush's CIA and Defense heads on is awful for a candidate who, in the primaries, I backed significantly because of foreign policy.
Joe Lieberman, Senate Homeland Security Chair: The less said at this point about the Bush kissing, non-Bush investigating, non-Katrina investigating, RNC-speaking, Democratic primary bucking, Republican Senate candidate endorsing, John McCain campaigning, anti-progressive Joe Lieberman, the better. But this was Obama's fault.
Lawrence Summers, Head of National Economic Council: Summers is significantly responsible for the de-regulated economic mess we now find ourselves in. That he should be rewarded by heading the National Economic Council and drafting the stimulus is stomach churning. For more detail, the Open Left archive on Summers describes my objections to Summers quite well. Next, we should appoint Paul Wolfowitz Secretary of Defense to reward him for his work in building up the American military.
Firing 200 organizers at the DNC: This one still sticks in my craw. Firing the 200 state party organizers, all of whom were picked by the local state parties and who collectively formed the heart of the fifty-state strategy, have been fired. They have been fired despite the DNC having plenty of money, and despite rhetorical commitments to the fifty-state strategy from Obama. But really, to fire all of the organizers who make up the strategy, while saying you are committed to the fifty-state strategy, is a lot like Bush's "Healthy Forests" initiative. It is killing the same thing it claims to be helping. It is just an Orwellian lie.
So, there it is. Consider anything I didn't list here to be either in a "meh" category where I have no strong feelings either way, or the position to be lacking in any clear frontrunner. As you can see, the "what excites me" category is a little light, but the other three categories are all roughly the same size. Overall, it is a mixed bag, but I stand by my disappointment that there isn't more to get excited about from a left-wing perspective. Mind you, I don't consider it a betrayal, as this is pretty much how Obama has said he will govern. Still, maybe after seeing "HOPE" posters around Philly for the last nine months, the sentiment can wear off. I hoped for more than he was promising on personnel, and I ended up somewhat disappointed as a result.
However, it is hardly a total loss. After the last eight years, having anything to be excited about, or even cautiously optimistic about, is still a very good thing.
