On Hillary Clinton, Political Capital, and Obama’s Choice

In recent days, there has been considerable speculation regarding Hillary Clinton’s role in President-elect Obama’s administration. Most signs point to her being offered the position of Secretary of State.

And yet, in my opinion, appointing Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, based on (what appears to be) the current criterion, is a bit of a wash.

Yes, it’s true that by having Hillary in the cabinet, Obama can rest a little easier than, say, if she was consistently out there criticizing his every policy move, plotting a run in 2012. It is also true, however, that even if Hillary does take the job, it would be prudent of her to perform her best, ensuring a solid Obama presidency, in order to maintain her own following and build up a considerable amount of political capital amongst Democrats (once again.) That way, four or eight years from now, whenever Obama has faded out of the White House, the opportunity will be hers. So, yes, Obama may be able to box her in for a time, but its not as though he’s going to be keeping her down forever.

Others contend that picking Hillary for what is arguably the most visible cabinet position, means that he can appease the Democratic base in addition to returning the favor for her campaigning during the general election. Such reasoning echoes the sentiments regarding Hillary as Obama’s vice presidential pick, and yet, as we know now, that never quite panned out. What makes people feel that this time may be different? Once again, the buzz phrase lately has been “political capital”, and the need to get things done immediately.

Now, before I move on, let me make myself absolutely clear. I’m sure Obama and his transition team aren’t oblivious to the two concerns stated above.

No, what I’m concerned about, I guess, is the gentle slide from the grand, sweeping notion of real change into the new governing mode. While talk of a “team of rivals” makes things interesting, I fear that Obama is playing the game a little too much, with this decision to appoint Hillary (should it move forward.) 

Because, really, what is the purpose of the Secretary of State? We know it’s not to look and act nice. We also know that the appointment process is merely a blip in one’s overall tenure; we should not as concerned as we are with “healing of the wounds” and appeasement that will come with Hillary’s appointment. Rather, we should look towards Hillary’s stance on actual policy when assessing her merit for the job. Ultimately, members of the global community, whilst initially enamored with Hillary’s personality, expect to get down to business at some point.

To be brief, our government cannot obtain the much-needed progress in this climate of perpetual campaigns, making decisions solely through that lens. In the same way that the Hillary appointment is being sold on a rather superficial basis, we must remember that Barack Obama’s very presidency could very well risk falling into the same trap. Yes, much of the world is enamored with his election. Soon, however, the world will quickly move on. This, I think, is where the real chance is for Obama to display the “change” that I myself heartily supported in the campaign.

It’s a cynical point of view, perhaps. And, I’m well aware that to govern, takes a degree of pragmatism. But that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t push the envelope.