Under Obama, a Skew Towards Male Appointees
Each of President Obama's top 10 advisers discussing intense fiscal matters on December 29 was a man, and since then he has put together a national security team dominated by men. While he has a greater number of women than George W. Bush had, there are significantly more men than women getting White House jobs under Obama. Many believe he should be working towards making it closer to a 50:50 ratio, and that women need more representation. However, he and those of his staff claim that he works towards having a diverse group of people and opinions. There doesn't seem to be one sole reason for the lack of female staff members. While Obama can appoint whomever he wants, there tend to be more men who step up and apply for governmental jobs, as it has been a male dominated area. There are a lot of other people in charge of putting people up as an applicant, so it is obviously not all up to Obama.
While I love the idea of having more governmental women to look up to, I don't want them to be hired just because people want to appear more diverse. I want people in Congress who are best for the job, regardless of sex, race, etc. If women want to be represented more, they should go out there and try for those jobs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would love to see a government with more females. However, the best person for the job needs to be appointed, regardless of gender. Still, government officials should try and appoint women if they are qualified. America is a diverse nation, and the government should reflect that. I would love to see more diversity in the age, gender, race, religion, and sexuality of national leaders as long as ultimately, qualified officials are getting the open positions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you said, I'd also like to see more diversity in officials and for people to look past those things. But over all of that it's more important that the best person's appointed to the jobs, not just having them there because of their gender or religion.
DeleteI think the quote the article includes from the director of presidential personnel, Nancy Hogan, is very interesting, saying that “The president puts a premium on making his team representative of the American people.” It doesn't matter to me the proportion of female appointees, but as far as what Ms. Hogan is saying, it seems to implying that the president is willing to pay a premium- in qualifications and in extra effort to obtain such individuals- in order to diversify his cabinet. In the same way the I am opposed to affirmative action, I think it's silly that so much emphasis is placed on the specific demographics of the Cabinet. How about focusing on the qualifications and backgrounds in politics?
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with Grace. Gender doesn't give anyone a special treatment- and neither does nor should race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. Merits and qualifications should absolutely come first when it comes to hiring people for te job. Also, I have observed that while there are some females involed in politics, there really aren't as many women as there are men. Either way, I really don't care what the gender is- so long as they are qualified and are doing their job well.
ReplyDeleteI definitely do not think that race, gender, etc. should qualify someone for a position but how qualified they are for the job and how effectively they will work. It does not matter to me if Obama has more men or women on his cabinet but that he chooses them based upon their qualifications.
ReplyDeleteAlthough adequate qualifications is an important aspect, in my opinion, to consider when appointing someone to a position, I do not believe that the positions should be offered without considering gender or race at all. The purpose of a diverse group is, as the article states, to provide representation that mirrors the American demographics. The U.S. is not made up of solely white males, so it is important to keep this in mind when considering who should be appointed. As far as appointment based on ability, the article implies that there are "tremendous women", such as Michèle Flournoy, Alyssa Mastromonaco, and Nancy-Ann M. DeParle, who are qualified for certain positions but will not likely be appointed to them, so it does not appear that men are being appointed solely due to the lack of credentialed women.
ReplyDeleteI think a person should be hired based on their qualifications, not by their gender, race, etc. If less women are applying for government jobs than it makes sense that there are more men in governmental offices. For there to be a 50/50 between man and woman on the white house staff, more woman need to be applying for government jobs.
ReplyDeleteI completely agreed with the reasoning that only the best-suited person for the job should be hired, but on a second thought, Kira makes an interesting point; we need to represent American demographics. As we have a large demographic of women, we need to correspond to such by having them hold more positions in office. There are highly capable men, but there are also highly capable women.
ReplyDeleteThe president has the freedom to do whatever he wants, and I would rather him pick the people he feels are suitable for the job. Equality would be fantastic but maybe Obama feels better with the people he has selected. America gets too caught up in irrelevant numbers, and it causes us to be even more judgmental.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that it is important for Obama to appoint whoever is best for the job, yet I am just a little surprised that he did not appoint more females just because he relies on a high support rate from the female population in this nation. Although it does not bother me that there is a higher male to female ratio, I can imagine that this fact would not sit well with other Americans. That is why I would think that Obama would have created a group that better reflected the population.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sean. Stop worrying about race, gender and all other irrelevant qualities in a person and base decisions off their merit. Merit is what will lead our country in the right direction not skin color, ethnicity, religion or gender.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with Liz. I want the best person suited for the job to have the job. I do not like the fact that many things have to become split 50/50. I think women are just as qualified as men and men are just as qualified as women but I do not like that it should be evenly. The best people suited for the jobs should have them regardless of the ratio.
ReplyDelete