Picking Biden's Cabinet

[DMC]

So with five posts to go, Biden is now at 11 male to 9 female for Cabinet level posts.  More glaringly, he's at 8 male to 4 female among the "Cabinet proper" with three picks to go.  I'd say it's incumbent upon him to have females at Commerce and Labor, especially if he opts for Jones or Garland at AG.  That'd be good news for Julie Su!

Also, saw somewhere (can't remember where right now, sorry) earlier today that Biden is considering Diana Taylor for SBA.  Not a big fan of her conservative leanings (particularly economically), but I don't really care too much.  What would be funny is if he appoints the partners of Michael Bloomberg and George Lucas between Taylor and Hobson at SBA and Commerce.

[SFDanny]

Looks like Biden has made a decision to nominate Kathleen Hicks to be the first woman as Deputy Secretary of Defense.

[DMC]

9 hours ago, SFDanny said:

Looks like Biden has made a decision to nominate Kathleen Hicks to be the first woman as Deputy Secretary of Defense.

Hardly a surprise, but good pick.

So with the election tomorrow I can't help but wonder/wildly speculate that Biden is holding off on the AG pick to see the results.  Which begs the question who would he be worried about nominating against a GOP Senate?  Sally Yates maybe?  I don't know, almost certainly nothing but idle speculation - finish the Cabinet already damnit!  Seems incredibly unlikely he's holding off on the other four (Commerce, Labor, CIA, SBA) for the same reason, so they're just behind.  I guess perhaps Labor if he really is gonna nominate Bernie.

[SFDanny]

32 minutes ago, DMC said:

Hardly a surprise, but good pick.

So with the election tomorrow I can't help but wonder/wildly speculate that Biden is holding off on the AG pick to see the results.  Which begs the question who would he be worried about nominating against a GOP Senate?  Sally Yates maybe?  I don't know, almost certainly nothing but idle speculation - finish the Cabinet already damnit!  Seems incredibly unlikely he's holding off on the other four (Commerce, Labor, CIA, SBA) for the same reason, so they're just behind.  I guess perhaps Labor if he really is gonna nominate Bernie.

Yates makes sense as a reason for the delay. Although It may also be he is going to announce a whole team at Justice, and needs to get them all in line, including Yates.

He can't nominate Bernie. Can he? While the Republican Governor can't appoint his own pick, it does place the Senate at play even if both Warnock and Ossoff win tomorrow. That would just be incredibly stupid, in my opinion.

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

He can't nominate Bernie. Can he? While the Republican Governor can't appoint his own pick, it does place the Senate at play even if both Warnock and Ossoff win tomorrow. That would just be incredibly stupid, in my opinion.

Well, conceivably the Dems could work out a deal with Scott for the interim appointment (which is a part of Vermont's vacancy law) to be, or at least caucus, with the Dems.  But I definitely don't think that's gonna happen, just trying to think of any pick among the other 4 open positions that would be a no-go under a GOP Senate.

I think you may be right that Biden is holding off on the AG to announce a more expansive Justice team, but I suspect if that's the case it means he's nominating a white male and wants to head-off diversity complaints.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Well, conceivably the Dems could work out a deal with Scott for the interim appointment (which is a part of Vermont's vacancy law) to be, or at least caucus, with the Dems.  But I definitely don't think that's gonna happen, just trying to think of any pick among the other 4 open positions that would be a no-go under a GOP Senate.

I think you may be right that Biden is holding off on the AG to announce a more expansive Justice team, but I suspect if that's the case it means he's nominating a white male and wants to head-off diversity complaints.

What I have read, and this is from November, is the Governor's interim appointment would be another independent that would caucus with the Democrats. But even if he keeps his word and does that there has to be a special election within six months that puts the seat into play. Personally, that seems to me to be a huge mistake. Special elections are a crap shoot. It would be a monumental tragedy to win the Senate majority tomorrow, and see it possibly lost in six months because Sanders wanted to be Labor Secretary.

With the AG, I can see that being the case if he really wants Jones as his Attorney General. Much less so with someone like Garland. I think it would be wise whoever the pick is to announce a team. Not just for diversity reasons, but to show a seriousness about returning to an independent and competent Justice Department. It should be a Democratic "A Team." And I don't mean the 80's TV show.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

But even if he keeps his word and does that there has to be a special election within six months that puts the seat into play. Personally, that seems to me to be a huge mistake. Special elections are a crap shoot. It would be a monumental tragedy to win the Senate majority tomorrow, and see it possibly lost in six months because Sanders wanted to be Labor Secretary.

Well, considering it's Vermont, the only Republican that could possibly win a Senate race is Phil Scott himself.  And I'm not even entirely sure he'd caucus with the Republicans.  But anyway, I agree it'd be unwise and, again, isn't gonna happen.  Was a purely hypothetical exercise trying to think of a name.

[SFDanny]

More information on the sub cabinet level nominees, while everyone waits for the Georgia polls to close. Wendy Sherman to return to the State Department as Blinken's deputy SoS. Victoria Nuland, a name many will also recognize from Obama days, will come back to State as the Under Secretary for Political Affairs. Jon Finer will become the deputy National Security Advisor. Also on the NSC will be Amanda Sloat in the position of Senior Director for European Affairs.

[SFDanny]

MSNBC is reporting Merrick Garland is Biden’s pick for AG. 

[DMC]

4 hours ago, SFDanny said:

MSNBC is reporting Merrick Garland is Biden’s pick for AG. 

Gonna repost my reaction to this earlier since you may have missed it in the politics thread.  Some stuff has come up.

2 hours ago, DMC said:

On Garland, Ian Millhiser has a crystal ball!!!

So, congratulations to Jackson!  She should be a great justice and that better happen soon, as it's the only thing that makes it worth it.  As I said last night, I do not get Garland as AG.  I am not convinced he'll be as aggressive as necessary - especially compared to Yates or Jones - and I'm not convinced he's right for the job as an administrator - again, especially compared to Yates or Jones.  After last night there was no concern about getting Yates confirmed and Jones would have been overwhelmingly confirmed.  Other than elevating Jackson, it's very hard for me to see upside here politically or substantively.

However, as anticipated, he announced the rest of the top DoJ team to soften the blow, and it is outstanding:

Gupta, in particular, is a great pick.  Hell, I'd much rather those three just occupy the top three spots.

 

[SFDanny]

6 hours ago, DMC said:

Gonna repost my reaction to this earlier since you may have missed it in the politics thread.  Some stuff has come up.

Thanks, I didn't go through and check the other thread for posts on the topic given this seems to be the right place to talk about Biden nominees.

Very much agree with you about the possibility of Ketanji Brown Jackson. She would be a great addition as Garland's replacement, and an even better one to replace Breyer. Her "Presidents are not Kings" ruling had me at "hello."

[SFDanny]

Biden has found  his "Irishman." Marty Walsh to be Secretary of Labor.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, SFDanny said:

Biden has found  his "Irishman." Marty Walsh to be Secretary of Labor.

Gina Raimondo at Commerce and Isabel Guzman at SBA as well, only CIA is left.  With one post to go, this means we're at 13-11 male/female - but notably of the Cabinet proper the spread is 10 male to only 5 female.  Racially, 5 black, 4 hispanic, 2 asian and one indigenous.  No asian secretaries is disappointing.  As is the gender spread - in particular the lack of women at prominent posts warrants considerable criticism IMHO.  

[SFDanny]

5 hours ago, DMC said:

Gina Raimondo at Commerce and Isabel Guzman at SBA as well, only CIA is left.  With one post to go, this means we're at 13-11 male/female - but notably of the Cabinet proper the spread is 10 male to only 5 female.  Racially, 5 black, 4 hispanic, 2 asian and one indigenous.  No asian secretaries is disappointing.  As is the gender spread - in particular the lack of women at prominent posts warrants considerable criticism IMHO.  

I'm assuming that Daniel Mckee takes over as Governor for Raimondo, and that there is no special election. McKee is a Democrat, but I must admit I know nothing of his politics.

I'm hoping the CIA pick is a woman, but a 13/12 ratio of men to women is still a failure in my view. Perhaps there will be new cabinet level positions created or elevated that will change that, but it needs either a equal number of women or a majority of women in these positions to meet the demands of the moment.

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

it needs either a equal number of women or a majority of women in these positions to meet the demands of the moment.

Agreed, that should be the standard.  And I hate to keep harping on it, but it's even more important the distribution is equitable based on the importance/prestige of the positions.  Yellen being the only real high profile nomination is unacceptable in my view.

[SFDanny]

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Agreed, that should be the standard.  And I hate to keep harping on it, but it's even more important the distribution is equitable based on the importance/prestige of the positions.  Yellen being the only real high profile nomination is unacceptable in my view.

Keep harping. It's much needed.

[Teng Ai Hui]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2020 at 1:58 PM, SFDanny said:

Ok, I've got the nominee at CIA for this crowd, David "Varys" Cohen. Alright, I made up the nickname, but to understand why you have to read to the bottom of the article about him. I'll give you a hint. It's not because of his love for ping pong.

Does anyone know what his cameo was and in which episode it happened?

*Sorry for necromancing a sidenote from 3 weeks ago

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Teng Ai Hui said:

Does anyone know what his cameo was and in which episode it happened?

It was in the second episode of the last season ("A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms") and is shown at the end of that link - lazy! - but here:

 

[SFDanny]

On 1/8/2021 at 12:04 AM, DMC said:

With one post to go, this means we're at 13-11 male/female - but notably of the Cabinet proper the spread is 10 male to only 5 female.  Racially, 5 black, 4 hispanic, 2 asian and one indigenous.  No asian secretaries is disappointing.  As is the gender spread - in particular the lack of women at prominent posts warrants considerable criticism IMHO.  

A question on your numbers. Are you including Harris in these numbers, and in the Cabinet proper? She should be included if you are not. I get 11 women without Harris. But I also come up with 14 men in Cabinet and Cabinet level positions. Are you including Kerry? I understood his new position would be Cabinet level? Am I wrong?

I see one mistake I made. I'm including both the head of the ODNI and the NSA in the cabinet. Sullivan isn't included. So I get a 13-12 male to female split without the CIA director. It is still possible, if I'm right, to have a 13-13 male to female ratio if Biden appoints a female CIA director.

[DMC]

16 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

Are you including Harris in these numbers, and in the Cabinet proper? She should be included if you are not. I get 11 women without Harris. But I also come up with 14 men in Cabinet and Cabinet level positions. Are you including Kerry? I understood his new position would be Cabinet level? Am I wrong?

I am not including Harris.  While the VP is definitionally part of the Cabinet (and 'Cabinet proper'), I consider it fundamentally different that the president's Cabinet selection process for a number of reasons - most importantly because Cabinet officials serve at the pleasure of the president.  Vice presidents do not; the president cannot fire them. 

I am including Kerry, and yes, you are of course right.  The new position was announced as Cabinet level in the initial press release.  I have seen certain outlets that haven't included the post.  While there are valid arguments for including the VP as part of the president's Cabinet selections (especially in Harris' case), I do not understand omitting Kerry or the post (if it's intentional rather than just an oversight/inaccuracy). 

Along with also being on the NSC, that was kind of the whole point of creating the position.  And it's entirely up to each president to decide which positions are "Cabinet level," as opposed to the "Cabinet proper," with many differences between presidents over the past 40-50 years (as we've discussed before) - so there's absolutely no reason not to include that post while including all the other "Cabinel level" posts.

27 minutes ago, SFDanny said:

I see one mistake I made. I'm including both the head of the ODNI and the NSA in the cabinet. Sullivan isn't included.

Yes, I'm not including NSA either.  Carter upped the position to Cabinet-level for Brzezinski, but he's the only president to have done so thus far and Biden hasn't either.