I have heard news sources mention numerous times recently that some of President Trump’s cabinet nominees have “very different views and beliefs” than he does. It makes me laugh! Have the media still not learned that ultimately, and without question, Donald Trump will advance his own agenda and have the last word? Have they not learned that he won’t hesitate to fire an insubordinate cabinet official or advisor? The difference is this time President Trump doesn’t need to rely on anyone for advice about who to select for these positions because he has observed all of them and has a comfort level with them.
However, let’s consider a few of them.
VP-elect J.D. Vance has voiced his support of unions and disfavors what he views as the predominance of the corporate world, alongside Lori-Chavez DeRemer, the pro-union Labor Secretary designate. However, then there is Scott Bissent, Treasury Secretary designate, who is solidly a creature of Wall Street. Then there is RFK, Jr., Health and Human Services Secretary designate, who is a major critic of, and highly suspicious of vaccines, who will, nevertheless, work alongside many others at that same agency—which includes the FDA—who are strong proponents of vaccines.
Then, there is Marco Rubio who is a strong believer in American military and diplomatic power—a muscular foreign policy, we might say, in the mold of President Reagan—alongside Pres. Trump himself, who is adamant about not getting us into any wars and ending the ones that currently exist the world over.
Perhaps what is most important to remember is that diverse viewpoints and principled disagreements are a great benefit to a Commander-in-Chief.
History reflects that President Kennedy encouraged heated debate among his cabinet members and advisors, including during the harrowing days of the Cuban Missile Crisis. There was vigorous disagreement among the principals in the Kennedy Administration regarding the handling of the crisis.
For example, Robert F. Kennedy, widely viewed by history as a voice of compassion grounded in the greater good, is said to have originally favored an invasion of Cuba but, as the days passed and the debate continued, he came around to the idea of a quarantine and/or blockade of Cuba as being the best approach by which to defuse the crisis and negotiate a face-saving resolution for the Soviet Union. (Robert Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis—A Reinterpretation, Mark White, September 2007).
Further, it was Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara who introduced the idea of blockading the island of Cuba and Deputy Secretary of State George Ball who first drew a parallel between a U.S. strike of Cuba and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. “This coming in there, Pearl Harbor,” Ball told his colleagues, “just frightens the hell out of me as to what goes beyond…. You go in there with a surprise attack. You put out all the missiles. This isn’t the end. This is the beginning, I think.” (Id.).
Still further, CIA Director John McCone’s minutes of one of the numerous meetings highlight the role played by former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union, Llewellyn E. Thompson, who challenged former Secretary of State Dean Acheson by making the case for a blockade. On the other hand, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Curtis E. LeMay favored military action and criticized calls to blockade the island advising President Kennedy that “a blockade and political talk” would be viewed as being “a pretty weak response to this.” (JFK and the Cuban Missile Crisis, UVA, and Miller Center).
My point is that President Kennedy had the benefit of these multiple and very diverse points of view to manage a crisis that could have become catastrophic. In connection with this it is appropriate to recall the view of Samuel Goldwyn who stated “I don’t want any yes-men around me. I want everybody to tell me the truth even if it costs them their job.”
President Trump will ultimately decide what the direction of his Administration will be, and he will reconcile all considerations into the policy he believes best addresses the needs of the country. However, as a newly elected President he is entitled to staff his administration the way he sees fit and I believe the more diverse viewpoints he is exposed to, and the more clearly and forcefully these viewpoints are made, the better for our nation. .
Shreveport attorney, Royal Alexander, worked in D.C. in the U.S. House of Representatives for nearly 8 years for two different Members of Congress from Louisiana.