Cabinet Stability
By 
As I suggested in my article at the Prospect about Deb Haaland, it makes a lot of sense for Harris to keep on most of Biden’s Cabinet. There’s already been an unusual amount of stability here, largely due to how hard it is to get anyone confirmed these days. And it does seem that Harris is looking for quite a bit of stability by keeping on Biden Cabinet appointees. She is going to want her own people in key slots, sure, but expect quite a few people to stay on.
Harris’ transition team has been identifying Cabinet members and ambassadors who might be willing to remain in their jobs after Biden’s term ends, though no formal inquiry has gone out asking them if they would stay, the sources said.
…
n the past, the Senate has shown deference to new presidents when it comes to appointing a Cabinet, a gesture meant to allow them to put their preferred team in place. But the creeping polarization in Washington has eroded bipartisan norms.
After becoming president in 2009, Barack Obama retained Robert Gates as defense secretary, making him the most prominent holdover from George W. Bush’s presidency. (Because Gates had already been confirmed, he didn’t need to win Senate approval to stay on).
Years later, Gates gave an oral interview and said that Senate confirmation had become so arduous that he was reluctant to fire people at the Pentagon because it would have been too difficult and time-consuming to get a new person confirmed.
“Polarization had gotten to the point on [Capitol] Hill where any senior confirmation in the national security arena was going to be tough,” Gates told the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. “I just didn’t feel like we could afford the loss of time that would be involved in bringing new people on board.”
If Republicans control the Senate next year, Harris nominees could face withering scrutiny from GOP senators eager to weaken her at the start.
“The question of what to do with current appointees — at all levels — is something we have to deal with,” a person familiar with Harris’ transition work said.
It sounds like most of the turnover would be in the national security positions, which are easier to get confirmations on. One prays for a new attorney general as well.
One other issue here–when I mention issues of what a Harris administration would look like, I have gotten comments that say things like “I don’t care about this, we have to focus on getting her elected.” Well, one can do both things and this is what I mean when I talk about a lot of commenters around here needing to rethink their approach to politics. If you aren’t thinking about these things and trying to place pressure where you can, then you just cede the field to those who already do that. This is the kind of politics that says “don’t worry about this issue until after the presidential election” and then the day after the presidential election says “we can’t worry about that, we need to prepare for the midterms.” This is electioneering without ideas. Yeah you have to win the elections. But without the ideas, what’s even the point?