|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America : US
Politics
Bush cabinet choices set the stage for mass social, political
struggles
By Patrick Martin
5 January 2001
Use
this version to print
In the selection of its cabinet, the new Republican administration
is proceeding as though George W. Bush and Richard Cheney had
won an overwhelming electoral mandate for extreme right-wing policies,
instead of having lost the popular vote and come to power as the
result of a reactionary and anti-democratic intervention by the
US Supreme Court.
During the election campaign, Bush and Cheney claimed to represent
an inclusive and more moderate face for the Republican
Party. They distanced themselves from the deeply unpopular Republican
congressional leadership. Bush did not even visit Washington DC
for eight months, from the time of a fundraising dinner last April
until after Gore's concession speech.
Now the pretense of broadening the base of the Republican Party
and reaching out to the disaffected is being scrapped. The incoming
administration is packed with right-wing ideologues and direct
representatives of corporate America. Several of the cabinet nominations,
notably John Ashcroft for attorney general, Gail Norton for interior
secretary and Linda Chavez for secretary of labor, amount to provocations
against the working class, minorities and those concerned with
the defense of civil rights, civil liberties and the environment.
These selections demonstrate, not merely the reactionary character
of the Bush-Cheney administration, but its insensitivity to the
deepening social and political crisis in the United States. The
election revealed a country deeply split, and even before the
new administration assumes power it is regarded as illegitimate
by millions of people. Rather than extend an olive branch to its
opponents, however, it is throwing down the gauntlet.
The presidential vote and the election contest in Florida provided
a glimpse of the enormous social divisions in America. Bush was
able to gain the presidency not only because of the intervention
of the five-member right-wing majority on the US Supreme Court,
but because the Democratic Party, the trade union bureaucracy,
the civil rights establishment and the other props of American
liberalism confined all opposition to the political coup in Florida
within the framework of the court system.
The Bush administration won power through a flagrant violation
of popular sovereignty, ratified by a Supreme Court majority that
based itself on the assertion that the people do not have a constitutional
right to vote for president or to have their votes fairly counted.
Bush's cabinet choices demonstrate that he is preparing to follow
this up with intensified attacks on democratic rights.
The result can be foreseen: the policies of the Bush administration
will inevitably provoke resistance from the masses, while discrediting
those who counseled submission to the Supreme Court and acceptance
of the Republican coup in the name of respect for the rule
of law.
Extremists and corporate operatives
The cabinet members and top White House aides whose appointments
have been announced over the past three weeks comprise two main
groups: representatives of the extreme right, chosen for their
hostility to the government programs they will administer, and
former officials of the Ford, Reagan and Bush administrations
who have spent the Clinton years in well-paying positions in corporate
America.
Bush takes office thanks to the suppression of tens of thousands
of votes in Florida, many of those cast by black and other minority
voters. It is therefore difficult to conceive of a more inflammatory
action than his nomination of outgoing Senator John Ashcroft as
attorney general, the official who will have principal responsibility
for enforcement of voting rights laws and the selection of new
federal judges, including justices of the Supreme Court.
Ashcroft, the son and grandson of fundamentalist ministers,
was one of the most right-wing members of the US Senate. He received
100 percent approval ratings from the Christian Coalition and
Phyllis Schlafly's Eagle Forum. The National Organization for
Women and the environmentalist League of Conservation Voters gave
him a rating of zero. Ralph Neas, president of People for the
American Way, a civil liberties group, said: With the possible
exception of Senator Jesse Helms, I do not believe anyone in the
United States Senate has a more abysmal record on civil rights
and civil liberties.
In his six years in the Senate, Ashcroft was identified with
the most anti-democratic and punitive social policies. He supported
an outright ban on abortion, even in the case of rape or incest,
and jail sentences of up to life in prison for doctors who perform
so-called partial birth abortions. In the 1996 welfare reform
legislation he tried unsuccessfully to ban all aid to unwed teenage
mothers, while introducing a successful amendment allowing states
to compel welfare recipients to get assistance from religious
groups.
Ties to racist groups
The nominee to head the Justice Department has longstanding
ties with racist groups. In 1998 and 1999 he contemplated a campaign
for the Republican presidential nomination, in which he would
have opposed Bush from the right. He gave a friendly interview
to Southern Partisan, a publication dedicated to defense
of the historical reputation of the Confederate slave owners.
Ashcroft hailed Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jefferson
Davis as patriots, adding that it was wrong to portray
the Confederate South as fighting for some perverted agenda.
Ashcroft swept a presidential straw poll of South Carolina
Republicans, beating Bush by 2 to 1, but eventually decided not
to run because of Bush's huge financial edge. Later in 1999 he
gave the commencement address at Bob Jones University, the South
Carolina fundamentalist college that only lifted its ban on interracial
dating last year, after public attention was focused on it during
the presidential campaign.
During the election campaign candidate George Bush repeatedly
deplored what he called the partisan warfare in Washington.
Ashcroft is the personification of this warfare. He was an early
and vocal supporter of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. During
the Senate trial, in which Ashcroft sat as a juror, his political-action
committee shared its fundraising lists with the legal defense
funds of Linda Tripp and Paula Jones. If Ashcroft takes office
as attorney general he will have significant influence on whether
Clinton is ultimately prosecuted for the Monica Lewinsky affair.
The Republican senator used his position on the Judiciary Committee
to delay or block Clinton judicial appointments. The most notorious
case involved Ronnie White, the first black member of the Missouri
Supreme Court, whom Clinton named to a federal district court
vacancy. Ashcroft launched a vicious attack on White, grossly
distorting his judicial record, that resulted in a party-line
55-45 vote to reject the nomination, the first time in nearly
50 years that a district court nominee was defeated in the Senate.
It is worth recalling that in 1993 the Clinton White House
had to withdraw two nominees for attorney general, Zoe Baird and
Kimba Wood, over minor infractions involving immigrant nannies.
These incidents, grossly inflated by the media on the grounds
that the chief law enforcement officer of the United
States had to be legally spotless, were the first in a long series
of provocations engineered by the extreme right against the Clinton
administration, culminating in impeachment.
The contrast to the present situation is staggering. Bush has
nominated an attorney general who opposes the entire framework
of civil liberties and civil rights protections established over
the past 50 years, who has close ties to racist and religious
fundamentalist groups, and there is only token resistance from
the Democrats. Not one Senate Democrat has yet declared opposition
to Ashcroft's nomination, and severalincluding Robert Torricelli
of New Jersey and Russ Feingold of Wisconsinhave said that
Ashcroft would be confirmed and they would vote for him.
Several other Bush nominations have the same character as the
selection of Ashcroftthe appointment of individuals with
long records of attacking the constituencies their agencies nominally
serve. These include:
* Gail Norton for secretary of interior a former
attorney for the anti-environmentalist Mountain States Legal Foundation,
an aide and protege of James Watt, Reagan's notorious interior
secretary, Norton is a right-wing ideologue of the property
rights movement, funded by the oil and strip-mining companies.
* Spencer Abraham for secretary of energy the
outgoing Michigan senator, defeated for reelection, introduced
legislation to abolish the Department of Energy in 1999, in favor
of sweeping deregulation. The former aide to Vice President Dan
Quayle also supported a bill to open the wilderness areas of the
Alaska National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling .
* Tommy Thompson for secretary of health and human services
the governor of Wisconsin is best known for his frequent
conflicts with the department he will now administer over requests
by his state government to establish welfare policies more restrictive
than the federal norm. Wisconsin ultimately served as the model
for Clinton's 1996 welfare reform, which has destroyed an important
element in the social safety net and reduced tens of thousands
of former aid recipients to destitution.
* Linda Chavez for secretary of labor a former
Democrat and union bureaucrat (politically educated in that incubator
of right-wing anticommunists, the national headquarters of the
American Federation of Teachers), Chavez became notorious as a
Reagan administration official for her attacks on civil rights
and affirmative action laws. She opposes minimum wage laws as
Marxist and regularly bashes unions in her syndicated
column.
Several other appointments also signal the support of the incoming
Bush-Cheney administration for the policies of the extreme right.
Rod Paige, the nominee for secretary of education, introduced
a school voucher program as school superintendent in Houston,
Texas, but only a handful of parents chose to enter it. He contracted
with private companies to handle garbage collection, food preparation
and schools for difficult students, and tied principals' pay to
student performance on standardized tests. His appointment is
a pledge of Bush's support for school vouchers and other measures
to encourage privatization in education.
Mel Martinez, the nominee for secretary of housing and urban
development, had little involvement in this field in his previous
position, as elected chief executive of Orange County, Florida.
His selection is less an indication of Bush's housing policyhe
has nonethan a payoff to the Cuban-American ultra-right
groups who played a key role in stealing the Florida election.
Martinez was a co-chairman of Bush's Florida campaign and played
a prominent role in the effort to block the return of Elian Gonzalez
to his Cuban father.
Donald Rumsfeld, the nominee for secretary of defense, is closely
identified with plans for a US anti-missile defense system. Pentagon
chief for the last 14 months of the administration of Gerald Ford,
25 years ago, Rumsfeld has since been a corporate CEO. In 1998
he headed a commission set up by congressional Republicans to
promote the missile defense plan, which is expected to be the
top military priority of the Bush administration.
Rumsfeld, prospective Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and several
other nominees are representative of the other component of the
Bush cabinetcorporate America. Rumsfeld was CEO of the pharmaceutical
company G.D. Searle for a dozen years, before moving on to the
electronics firm General Signal Corp.
O'Neill will move to the Treasury from the boardroom of Alcoa,
the world's biggest aluminum maker, where he is retiring after
13 years as CEO. O'Neill was a top-level budget official in the
Ford administration, then headed International Paper before joining
Alcoa. A longtime crony of Cheney, O'Neill was recruited for the
Alcoa post by Alan Greenspan, then on the board of the giant corporation,
now chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. O'Neill returns to
government enormously enriched by his tenure at Alcoahe
is reportedly worth at least $100 million, and holds options on
Alcoa stock which dwarf those of Cheney at Halliburton, the oil
services company Cheney headed for five years.
Bush's commerce secretary will be Donald Evans, a Texas oil
millionaire who is his campaign chairman and closest personal
friend. His secretary of veterans' affairs, Anthony Principi,
was number two in that department under Bush's father, before
becoming a corporate executive at Lockheed Martin, the big military
contractor. The token Democrat in the cabinet, former congressman
Norman Mineta, named as secretary of transportation, also worked
for Lockheed Martin after leaving Congress in 1995.
Ann Veneman, the nominee for secretary of agriculture, is the
first product of California agribusiness to hold that position
(her father was a Modesto peach and grape grower turned Republican
politician). She was deputy secretary of agriculture in the administration
of Bush's father, then returned to California to head the Department
of Food and Agriculture under Governor Pete Wilson. In 1996, after
several instances of school children being sickened by tainted
strawberries, Veneman called a news conference and publicly consumed
the fruit in order to debunk the scare.
Corporate connections are even more pervasive among the incoming
White House staff. Chief of Staff Andrew Card was head of the
American Automobile Manufacturers Association, then vice president
of General Motors. National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice,
a former Reagan White House aide and Stanford provost, is on the
board of directors of Chevron and Charles Schwab, and advises
J.P. Morgan. Budget Director Mitch Daniels was a vice president
of drug maker Eli Lilly. Deputy chief of staff for policy Josh
Bolten comes from Goldman Sachs International. Joseph Hagin, deputy
chief of staff for operations, was an executive at Chiquita Brands
and Federated Department Stores. David Addington, counsel to Richard
Cheney, was general counsel of the American Trucking Association.
The Bush cabinet has been hailed by the media for its diversityonly
six of fifteen cabinet-level officials are white males, the remainder
include blacks, Hispanics, women, an Arab-American, an Asian-American,
etc. But it is a measure of the insulated character of the political
and media establishment that it entertains the notion that deeply
reactionary social policies can be made palatable to broad masses
of the American people by such cosmetic gestures.
Judged from the only serious standpoint, by its social and
class character, rather than the details of color and gender,
the Bush cabinet is of a piece: politically reactionary, hostile
to the interests of working people, subservient to the dictates
of corporate America. It embodies the chasm that separates the
political elite from the population it claims to represent. This
administration is certain to set in motion a broad and deep-going
process of political radicalization in the US.
See Also:
US targets Venezuela:
Bush plans aggressive policy in Latin America
[30 December 2000]
A distinction to
be noted
George W. Bush: president-elect or president-select?
[29 December 2000]
The political crisis
in the US: its implications for Europe and the world
Editorial of Gleichheit, journal of the Socialist Equality
Party of Germany
[28 December 2000}
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |