Obama's Cabinet

It really is astonishing to me the problems that Barack Obama is encountering with some of his Cabinet picks — even with the high level of support the new president seems to have from the people and the members of Congress (including some of the Republican members, although you couldn't tell it from the House vote on the stimulus plan last week).

And some of his selections have virtually sailed through their confirmations, when I expected them to face more resistance. Hillary Clinton, for example. No matter what one thinks of her experiences and background and whether they qualify her for the post of secretary of state, she's clearly a polarizing figure — yet she won almost unanimous approval from the Senate.

Tom Daschle, on the other hand, was a member of the Senate more than twice as long as Clinton. He served as majority leader for about 18 months. Prior to his service in the Senate, he was in the House for about eight years. Although he had his detractors in Congress in the years he spent there, he was never the lightning rod Clinton is. Yet he's run into many problems on his way to being confirmed as secretary of health and human services.

And, at the moment, it seems far from certain that Daschle will win the Senate's approval and join Clinton in future Cabinet meetings. Even the New York Times thinks he should withdraw.

Yet, for Daschle, there may be a ray of hope coming from the somewhat uneasy confirmation given to Obama's choice for attorney general, Eric Holder. Holder won confirmation by a vote of 75-21. No Democrats voted against Holder — although two did not vote — and nearly half of the Republicans voted in favor of him — in spite of his controversial role in the pardon of fugitive Marc Rich in the final days of Bill Clinton's presidency.

Now comes the news that Obama has designated New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, a Republican, to be secretary of commerce.

Yesterday, I was listening to the radio and I heard a conservative commentator fretting about the nomination of Gregg and how the Democratic governor of New Hampshire would probably appoint a fellow Democrat to replace him — therefore achieving what the Democrats could not achieve at the ballot box last November — a "filibuster-proof" 60-seat majority in the Senate.

That concern appears to be baseless. According to David Rogers at Politico.com, the New Hampshire governor, John Lynch, will issue a statement today (supposedly coinciding with Obama's announcement of Gregg's nomination) that the seat will remain in Republican hands.

CNN says it has confirmed both that Gregg has accepted the offer from Obama and the New Hampshire governor's office has said that the seat will remain Republican.

"But lost in the shuffle is the greater dynamic," writes Rogers, "Gregg himself and the fact that Obama, while talking a good game about bipartisanship, is draining the Senate of the very talent he needs to achieve this goal."

As Rogers points out, Gregg has a history of being a fiscal conservative, but he has an independent streak. It's hard to gain a hold on his position based on ratings from the National Journal — in 2005, Gregg's rating on economic issues seemed to be more centrist, but it veered far to the right the following year.

In some of his key votes in recent years, Gregg voted to repeal the estate tax, he voted against raising the minimum wage, and he supported funding for embryonic stem cell research.

While having Gregg in the Cabinet will certainly help Obama and may make it easier for Republicans to accept economic policies from the White House, the absence of his ability to compromise and reach across the aisle in the Senate could be a blow to the desire for bipartisan action on a whole batch of policy proposals.

And, while the Republican Party has been reduced to minority status, it still commands a large following in some parts of the country.

One of the many mistakes the Republicans made during George W. Bush's presidency was to treat their Democratic counterparts as if they were irrelevant. When political tides began to shift, they had burned their bridges and found few, if any, Democrats willing to compromise with them.

It's a fine line Obama must tread as president. He leads a party that holds large majorities in both houses of Congress, but power can be fleeting. It may seem unlikely now, but Obama could find himself leading the minority party midway through his term in office, the same as Clinton did.

That will depend on the decisions he makes today.