Study Analyzes Diversity of Obama Administration
EmailThe National Journal looks at the diversity of the Obama administration, beyond the fact that only nine of the 22 officials designated as having Cabinet rank are white men.
The Journal's look at "366 of the president's Decision Makers — people appointed or nominated to senior positions throughout the executive branch — found that white men hold 52 percent of the jobs. But when 49 holdovers from the Bush era are excluded, white guys make up just under half — 49 percent — of the Obama team."
Some other findings:
25 percent of President Obama's Decision Makers worked on his campaign, compared with 34 percent for President Bush;
37 percent worked at a think tank or in academia;
37 percent have an undergraduate or graduate degree from an Ivy League school;
28 percent of Obama's DMs were business executives at some point in their careers, compared with 38 percent of Bush's; and
12 percent served in the military.
Check out the full study HERE.
-jpt
Obama: 'Now Is the Time For Common Sense Action' 
Romney Takes Aim at Conservatives
The thing that strikes me the most is that only 12% of his “decision makers” have served in the military, but 37% have worked for a think tank or academia doing no real work and not being responsible for people or projects affecting large numbers of people.
Posted by: Jason | June 22, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am
Looking back at Bush’s admin, they weren’t a whole lot better when it came to former military at 18% and he had 27% who worked in academia or think tanks, so I am guessing that is why the war and counter terrorism efforts were badly mismanaged, especially in the early years of Bush’s term. I know politicians and soldiers don’t always get along, but politicians should realize that there is a large group of experienced former military who can provide executive experience and not have the stigma of having worked as a lobbyist or for a big business.
Posted by: Jason | June 22, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
Too bad we seem to be more concerned with the color of the skin (and gender) rather than the content of character. And quality of work provided.
Posted by: Axey | June 22, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am
It is impossible to find a way to contact ABC News online. Any respect I had for this network as legitimate journalism is gone. The last straw is this infomercial masquerading as debate over health care. I am learning more about Bo’s diet than the other side of any national issues. Nearly everything since November has neen an infomercial. In particular, I am disappointed in Diane Sawyer, who i had thought was more of a journalist than this.
Posted by: richard | June 22, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
What a snarky way to unfairly target the Obama administration…
Posted by: matt | June 22, 2009, 11:07 am 11:07 am
The actual report is interesting. Obama’s administration is moderately more diverse than Bush’s, but not radically so. With such a small population set, the numbers could also be random. For example, Obama has 10% more black officials than Bush – that means he has 11 instead of 10.
He may brag up being more diverse than ever before, but it looks like simply demographics to me. The pool of highly skilled minorities is increasing every year, and barring active discrimination, it is natural that future administrations will approach closer and closer to the nation’s demographic makeup.
Posted by: jhw539 | June 22, 2009, 11:10 am 11:10 am
It doesn’t matter how many were in the military.
Bush had an exemplary military decision maker in Colin Powell… but he totally ignored him.
Worse, the GOP, for the most part, has decided to trash Powell rather than acknowledge Bush’s folly in ignoring him.
You could have veterans comprise 90% of an administration… but if the president is driven by an ideological 10% (like Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bolton, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Libbey, Woolsey, Perle, etc.)… they are still going to make the same decisions.
They’ll cut regulations and services domestically, consolidate power in the executive, and choose war over diplomacy.
Posted by: borneo | June 22, 2009, 11:21 am 11:21 am
“Any respect I had for this network as legitimate journalism is gone. The last straw is this infomercial masquerading as debate over health care.”
To judge before an event or meeting someone =
the holding of preformed opinions based on insufficient knowledge, irrational feelings, or inaccurate stereotypes = Prejudice.
results from = narrow-mindedness, discrimination,intolerance,injustice,unfairness
Posted by: watching | June 22, 2009, 11:26 am 11:26 am
I can form an opinion on an event before seeing it when the network won’t allow arguments against and only gives a voice to one side of a serious debate that effects all of us. Let them try that next time someone you don’t support is in office.
Be careful how much power you give to one branch of government. You don’t know who will hold it in the future. Shortsightedness will destroy us.
Posted by: andylancaster | June 22, 2009, 11:34 am 11:34 am
jhw539, I am glad that we found something, as common sense as it is, that we agree on. I was starting to wonder if we viewed every single issue from opposite angles. I agree with borneo that it isn’t the number of people of a certain group a president has,it is who he listens to the most, and typically most presidents listen to those who agree with them ideologically. I disagree with your last assertion that they cut regulations and services domestically, consolidate power in the executive, and choose war over diplomacy. The only one of those they were guilty of was consolidating power in the executive branch.
Posted by: Jason | June 22, 2009, 11:37 am 11:37 am
To his credit, Obama has historically shown himself to thrive in “conflict.” I know it is popular among dittoheads to call him an “idiot” and ridicule his use of a teleprompter, but the guy really is revealing himself to be a pragmatist with radical leanings, who is willing always to take the compromise position.
I think in Obama’s case, this diversity, particularly the intellectual diversity that he has chosen is a real strength.
It leaves him vulnerable to charges that he is “indecisive”… but he’s using a different process to lead… He favors debate and group decision-making… and it is a process which historically has been shown to yield better decisions in the long run.
In fact, people who are suspicious of group decision-making tend to be unaware, even, of the shortcomings of unitary executive decision-making. Which means, at the front end, they tend to make bad decisions. But on the back end, they are too ego invested in their authority to correct those decisions when they prove mistaken.
This model of leadership isn’t without its risks, but on the whole, the “indecisive” leader who relies upon debate is going to be practically better than the “decisive” leader, even if he is going to function less effectively from a symbolic perspective.
Posted by: borneo | June 22, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am
“I can form an opinion on an event before seeing it when the network won’t allow arguments against and only gives a voice to one side of a serious debate that effects all of us.”
exactly = prejudice
The nopposition can get their own time slot to present their plan, take questions. I will listen with an open mind.
The fact remains that you nor I have heard the questions, which can be pretty tough ones submitted from average people. I want more details of the plan. I also want to hear more than NO
Posted by: watching | June 22, 2009, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
How dare he choose these minorities when there are so many perfectly qualified white men for the job!
Posted by: Jeff | June 22, 2009, 12:46 pm 12:46 pm
Too bad we seem to be more concerned with the color of the skin (and gender) rather than the content of character.
~~~~~
Amen!
Posted by: Plumber | June 22, 2009, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
Matt wrote, “What a snarky way to unfairly target the Obama administration.,” to which I must respond with a resounding, “Huh?” Who is being snarky? Jake? The National Journal? Or (surely) some commenter? In what way is the compiling of benign statistics ‘unfair’?
And I too am pleased to see that jhw and I are on the same page for a change. Statistics are basically meaningless here. The differences between, say, the Obama and Bush administrations on the number of officials who are of color or who have military experience are so small as to be relatively meaningless.
I will admit to grinning when I read in the report (I followed the link provided) that the percentage who had lobbying experience fell from 19% all the way down to 13%. But that is a vague statistic– the number of people is still small and “experience” in lobbying may mean anything from serving as a lobbyist for a nonprofit 20 years ago to working fulltime as a lobbyist for big pharma for the last 10 years.
Posted by: moderate | June 22, 2009, 2:13 pm 2:13 pm
“Too bad we seem to be more concerned with the color of the skin (and gender) rather than the content of character.”
Gee I wonder if we’re at that point yet….
“A Republican aide has been reprimanded for circulating a racist email about US President Barack Obama”
“Rusty DePass, the South Carolina Republican activist who infamously “joked” that an es- caped zoo gorilla was probably an ancestor of Michelle Obama’”
Guess not…
Posted by: Ryan C | June 22, 2009, 2:33 pm 2:33 pm
Most of us have been at that point for a long time Ryan. Apparently not you.
Posted by: Plumber | June 22, 2009, 3:07 pm 3:07 pm
The way to a post-racial society is to make everything about race! Brilliant. (And if you question that..you are a racist.)
Posted by: andylancaster | June 22, 2009, 3:17 pm 3:17 pm
“Most of us have been at that point for a long time Ryan. Apparently not you.”
I suggest you remove your head from the sand.
Racism is still quite alive and well…in the Republican party.
Posted by: Ryan C | June 22, 2009, 4:55 pm 4:55 pm
Pleeeze, who cares as long as the Administration is doing their jobs and don’t inhibit from others from doing theirs…I believe that there are more important issues that need to be focused on right now than the physical make-up of the Obama Administration
Posted by: Republican | June 22, 2009, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Oh, Ryan, give it a rest. One Republican staffer circulating a racist email– which is wrong and to be condemned– does not a racist Republican party make. Are you telling me there are simply no Democrats anywhere who are equally ignorant?
Racism is NOT alive and well in the Republican party. If you need big-name nationally known figures, ask Condi Rice, Colin Powell, or Michael Steele.
Posted by: moderate | June 22, 2009, 6:35 pm 6:35 pm
“I suggest you remove your head from the sand.
Racism is still quite alive and well…in the Republican party.”
Last time I checked, it’s just as rampant among Democrats. Or are you denying that?
In fact, the left wingers seem to lead in hypocrisy in regards to issues of racial, gender and religious bigotry as well. They’re every bit as bigotted as the Republicans, but they go out of their way to deny it…framing their anti-Semitism as “anti-Zionism” for example.
And promising equal rights for gays in the campaign and then backtracking until they face financial repercussions for such duplicity.
Posted by: paul | June 22, 2009, 6:59 pm 6:59 pm
Why are women so under-represented? (as usual)
Even the focus of the study is on white men, rather than the perpetual shortchanging of women in the workplace.
Some things never seem to change.
Posted by: paul | June 22, 2009, 7:02 pm 7:02 pm
“Oh, Ryan, give it a rest. One Republican staffer circulating a racist email– which is wrong and to be condemned– does not a racist Republican party make”
Considering that the letter of “reprimand” praised the aide and discussed policy as opposed to decency of not being a racist, I have my doubts.
Of course you can add to that the GOP activist calling Michelle a gorilla, the various GOPers who have called Obama boy or uppity.
The Republican party still relies on a portion of its base that is outright racist.
That is why so much of the anti-Obama material of the campaigns and today have the “he’s not one of us” flavor.
“Racism is NOT alive and well in the Republican party. If you need big-name nationally known figures, ask Condi Rice, Colin Powell, or Michael Steele.”
Look at all our black friends!
Remind me again how Colin Powell was treated when he stated he would vote for Obama?
Posted by: Ryan C | June 22, 2009, 7:52 pm 7:52 pm
And these comments condemning racism and bigotry in America, while calling for the Freedom of the Iranian people…uh, like they care. Strangely Hypocrisy…. The Republicans uses fear and smear….Race being their number for years. They have taken racist, uneducated and ignorant people and used them to “ramp” up fear, knowing ignorance is what causes racism. (Look at your schools, they don’t put education first because education wipes out “ignorance”. When that no longer worked, they “ramp” up the fear with “Muslims”. Remember the republicans had all the ignorant people believing that only “blacks” committs crime….so they scare them on that! Then they lead the idiots to believe that only “blacks” receive welfare, and when “welfare” didn’t exist anymore, they refused to call it Low-Wage Earners that are raising families, leaving the idiots still saying “welfare” and “get a job”. This is why many of you commenting “just can’t believe you have a “black” President, and refuse to admit that your perception based on what you’ve been fed, not just by the Right wing, but by your racist parents were wrong. Get over it. Racism is wrong and therefore IS the minority.
Posted by: tychisum | June 22, 2009, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm
“Look at all our black friends!” That was not what I meant. That was not, “some of my best friends are black,” but “to start with the glaringly obvious examples of how the GOP has put black Republicans in positions of authority.
“Remind me again how Colin Powell was treated when he stated he would vote for Obama?” Better than Joe Lieberman was treated by the Democrats when he decided to support Bush and the war in Iraq.
I personally am a big Powell fan, but then again, I’m a moderate Republican, as is he, so you, Ryan C, assume I don’t exist. After all, you use “right wingers” as a synonym for “republican,” as far as I can tell.
Posted by: moderate | June 22, 2009, 9:17 pm 9:17 pm
Someday, I hope we can get over identity politics and just hire the best person for the job regardless of race, creed, etc. We need good people. Period.
So I have to ask those who insist on playing identity politics… do the identity politics actually reflect the % of the population who are non-white or are whites being discriminated against in the numbers? Like I said… I’m tired of this identity rat race.
Posted by: Sadie | June 23, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm