ChrisWeigant.com

Biden Fills Out His Cabinet

[ Posted Wednesday, December 9th, 2020 – 16:19 UTC ]

President-Elect Joe Biden has been making lots of news with his slow rollout of nominees for various cabinet choices, top advisors, czars, and agency heads. So far, Team Biden has taken a very systematic approach, choosing one or two main areas each week (such as pandemic response or the economy), and then rolling out entire teams of top advisors all at once. This helps the media and the public keep their focus on individual areas of responsibility, and as a result it gives all the Biden picks lots of good press (for being so gradual and comprehensible).

Of course, as with any incoming Democratic president, there are a lot of groups vying for influence in the upcoming Biden administration, some playing pure identity politics (arguing for more of a certain minority or gender or what have you) while others are playing more of an ideological game (trying to get more progressives appointed, for example). With each new announcement, some groups are happy while others are disappointed. Such is the nature of filling out an administration, it is worth pointing out, and such is the nature of the Democratic Party's various wings and power centers (the Will Rogers quote: "I am not a member of any organized political party -- I am a Democrat" springs to mind).

I have been waiting to write about Biden's choices so I could make a few overall comments rather than get too heavily into the specifics of any individual choice or set of choices, though. Partly this is because a lot of the nominees are not exactly well-known names (except by the wonkiest of political wonks), therefore I just didn't know a whole lot about them -- other than that they all seem to be eminently competent and sane people, so that'll be a big change right there.

My own expectations for a Biden cabinet team were pretty low, I have to admit. I thought he'd fill it out with a bunch of centrists, corporatists, party hacks, and friends and allies from his days in the Senate and as vice president. I thought the team would be largely boring, but also well-qualified. But I didn't have a whole lot of expectations higher than that. To be fair, I would have said (and probably did, at the time) the same thing about Barack Obama's initial cabinet choices -- I could see the centrist and Wall Street-friendly side of Obama even during the campaign, so that's what I expected for his cabinet, and he largely fulfilled this expectation. I expected much the same from Biden, but with a larger emphasis on the working class. Biden would probably be marginally better in cabinet choices than Obama, and a whole lot better than those Hillary Clinton would have chosen, to put the choices on the Democratic political spectrum.

I didn't expect much in the way of exciting, and I didn't expect any fire-breathing progressives to make the cut. I've been saying ever since he secured the nomination that if Biden won, his presidency will probably draw a lot of comparisons to another boring and soporific president, Dwight D. Eisenhower. So that's kind of what I expected for Biden's cabinet as well.

Biden is now somewhere around half-finished with his cabinet announcements. So there is still room for improvement, no matter how you personally define that. But at the halfway mark, I have to say that I am more impressed than I thought I would be. Biden seems to be walking the tightrope dangling between all the various factions pretty well, at least so far. No group has been entirely shut out of the process, and no one group has dominated it either. Biden's picks are all (as mentioned) competent people who have a proven ability to lead large organizations, almost without exception. There will be "first ever" milestones set for women, Blacks, Latinos, and probably plenty of other groups by the time Biden is done. Perhaps not the exact milestone each group may have been shooting for, but like I said, Biden's doing a fairly good job of walking this tightrope.

Biden said he wanted his cabinet to "look like America." So far, he's doing a pretty good job of that. Sure, there are a few old White guys who have been in Democratic leadership positions in previous administrations, but even old White guys can't get totally shut out of the process, right? To be honest, I thought there would be a lot more of them in a Biden administration than I've so far seen, so even on this metric Biden is doing better than I thought he would.

There have been some surprising picks, some of whom might eventually prove to have been somewhat misguided. Someone who clearly has a certain expertise in one field gets a rather unrelated leadership job, to put this another way. Xavier Becerra will head the Department of Health and Human Services, for example, when I would have bet more on him becoming Biden's attorney general (the job he currently holds in California). That's just one example that stood out for me.

As for ideology, well, Biden did run as the ultimate centrist, please remember. He beat out all the other centrist Democrats and then the race came down to him and progressive champion Bernie Sanders. Because Sanders did so well (he was truly the only Democrat to give Biden a run for his money at any time during the race), he has had much more influence on Biden, both throughout the campaign and during the transition process. If Bernie hadn't been the second-to-last man standing -- if it had come down to a race between Biden and Pete Buttigieg, for example -- then this almost certainly never would have happened. So far, both Bernie and Elizabeth Warren have not been named to Biden's cabinet, but even that snub would be agreeable if Biden eventually names at least one person with very solid progressive credentials to a high-ranking post. A few progressives have already gotten leadership positions, just not very prominent ones for the most part.

Of course, the big difference was one we all expected and can greet with a collective sigh. Joe Biden has not chosen any idiots at all for his administration. There are no patently unqualified individuals at all. Also, no close family members at all. And, even better, there also don't seem to be any boot-lickers, toadies, or other sycophants on the list either. So that right there will be a complete sea-change from what we have seen for the past four years in Donald Trump's White House.

We're still only roughly at the halfway point. There will be some surprises ahead, no doubt. One group or another is going to be delighted, which will leave others disappointed. But all around, none of them have completely gotten the cold shoulder from the transition team. Biden's cabinet and leadership team shows a wide degree of diversity in pretty much any sense of the word, really. Some of Biden's picks might work out, and some might not. Some may not even survive confirmation in the Senate. In general, though, Biden seems to be doing a better job than I had expected in filling out his cabinet.

But the best news, once again, is that none of them are idiots or toadies. Imagine that!

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

13 Comments on “Biden Fills Out His Cabinet”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Slow rollout? 'the heck d'ya mean!?

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Oh, I see. I get what you're sayin'. :)

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    There have been some surprising picks, some of whom might eventually prove to have been somewhat misguided. Becerra will head the Department of Health and Human Services, for example, when I would have bet more on him becoming Biden's attorney general (the job he currently holds in California). That's just one example that stood out for me.

    Sure, surprising to you and me. But, if I know anything about Joe Biden, then the Becerra pick for HHS won't prove to be misguided.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    As for the predictable grumbling on who is in the cabinet and who is not, Biden knows far better about these picks than any of the grumblers.

    I don't care who he picks for what because I have complete confidence in Biden's ability to pick the right person for the job. In fact, let me predict right here and now that Biden's appointments will stand the test of confirmation and time as good or better than any administration in US history. :)

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I hope this is the right link for the performance tonight of the Beatles album Rubber Soul by Classic Albums Live, cut for cut, note for note ... it starts at 8pm EST in about twenty minutes (not to be confused with the Gowan show tomorrow night!)

    https://vimeo.com/484881505

  6. [6] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Wow, that was another great show!

  7. [7] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yes, Joe has heretofore shown some real political deftness in his nominations. I'd also point out that because Joe could find wall to wall quality yet diverse candidates testifies to the sheer amount of talent in America.

    Enroute to becoming a "well-rounded Renaissance man," I got through three years of a tough Business School.

    Oddly enough, the Accounting education added support to why I've been a Feminist all my life. IMO women* across the planet are held down by a plethora of means. And this hurts everybody on the planet because it's such an enormous waste of talent. Just think of how much better off we collectively would be if all of humanity's assets were put in play!

    *Plug in any other [non-CIS white male] group into this sentence and it's still true.

  8. [8] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    I always wanted to know what it would be like to simultaneously experience the Spanish flu, Great Depression, and 1968 mass protests while Andrew Jackson was president.

    -- Miranda Yaver
    @mirandayaver

  9. [9] 
    Bleyd wrote:

    I'm glad to see that Sanders and Warren haven't gotten cabinet positions. While a high level cabinet position may seem more prestigious, I think they can do more for the progressive cause where they are. Cabinet members function (with a a few exceptions) mostly behind the scenes, so pretty much any competent liberal democrat can do the work required to aid the progressive cause. The senate, on the other hand, is far more public, and Warren and Sanders have talents that are uniquely useful in that venue. Let Warren continue to show off her wonkiness and knowledge as she helps craft legislation, and let Sanders continue to be the firebrand that energizes the public.

  10. [10] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Jimmy Dore is the best educational voice you've got? The only substantial difference I see between YOU and Jimmy is that he has a YouTube channel and that he actually works to keep it going. Content wise, his approach is not that different than yours. Many complaints, many conspiracy theories, no convincing ways forward to address the complaints or provide hard evidence backing up his conspiracy theories. A call to action, but no convincing plan of action. His Tube audience is the Left Wing version of the middle tier Tea Party-ists. I've never seen his comedy act. Maybe that's good.

    Wake up, Rise up, Do Some Hard Work.

  11. [11] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Another reason for not appointing Warren or Sanders to the cabinet is that Republican governors would appoint their pro tem replacements. The same goes for any other Dem senator with a Rep governor, in current conditions. Fortunately, the field of decent choices is wide enough and deep enough that Dem senators can be left where they are.

  12. [12] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Rudy G is out the hospital and back to grifting. His doctors treated him with the same drug cocktail Trump got - plus Gas-X.

  13. [13] 
    SF Bear wrote:

    CW: As you know all across the country Repug legislatures as passing, or considering new laws to either outlaw or make voting by mail more difficult. Of course this is but one of many laws and rules they have pursued to diminish the right to vote. It seems to me that federal legislation to regularize voting procedures, and to encourage voter participation is necessary. However, I am confused by the complex constitutional impediment to such federal legislation. I would love to see you weigh in on this subject and clarify what could be done given our existing constitutional framework. Also I would be most interested in learning what kinds of legislation you think would be most helpful.

Comments for this article are closed.