Almost two years ago on a cold February day, on the steps of the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield, Ill., Barack Obama declared his candidacy for the presidency of the United States. On that day he declared, "I know that I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change." His campaign became famous for that call for change with slogans such as "Vote For Change" and "A Change We Can Believe In." Based on these slogans, his recent cabinet and staff appointments may be deemed puzzling to some.
From his choices of Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff, Tim Geithner and Larry Summers as the leaders of his economic team, Eric Holder as his Attorney General, Hillary Clinton as his Secretary of State, and many other cabinet and staff appointments, one might think that having served in the Clinton administration is a prerequisite to serving in the Obama administration. One might be excused to wonder how the officials of a previous administration will alter the status quo in Washington. However, it must be noted that the main point of President-elect Obama's campaign promises were not to bring about a superficial change in terms of the individuals in charge, but a fundamental change in terms of how the government operates.
One of the most disgusting aspects of the Bush administration was a rampant and un-American cronyism throughout federal government appointments. Through most of the Bush presidency, the candidates for federal office were measured by their loyalty to President Bush and right wing doctrine, as opposed to their qualifications for the position. This policy led to the appointment of Michael D. "Heckuva Job" Brownie as the head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the nomination of Harriet Miers for the Supreme Court, and the U.S. attorneys firing scandal at the Department of Justice. There are, however, no questions about the qualifications of Obama's cabinet nominees. Liberals and conservatives alike agree on the capabilities of Eric Holder as a legal scholar, Rahm Emanuel's help is considered pivotal in Obama's attempt to push his reform agenda through Congress, and following Obama's appointment of Tim Geithner as his Treasury Secretary, the Dow experienced its biggest two-day increase in 21 years. Therefore, Obama is delivering on his promise to change the way the government runs by appointing highly qualified individuals to government positions.
However, if we get past some of the idealism inherent to the change slogan, many of the president-elect's appointments are simply intended to undo the damage done to this country over the past eight years. It is difficult to imagine a single instance in which this administration has improved any part of America over the past eight years. This fact might be one of the reasons behind the decision to name James Lee Witt as the new head of FEMA. Witt, who took over this agency at the start of the Clinton administration and left it eight years later with a much better reputation, might be coming out of retirement to head that agency for six months to one year to take it back to its form during the 1990s. The attempt to return this country to its position before President Bush took office seems to be another rationale for many Obama appointments.
For those who thought that Obama's definition of change was to simply appoint a group of cabinet members that they had never heard of, the bad news is that you were wrong, but the good news is that he is offering something better: a functioning and responsive government. That is change I can believe in.
Ehsan Sadeghipour is a senior in mechanical engineering. He can be reached at sadeghipour.2@osu.edu.
Be the first to comment on this article!