First Spouse – An Official Cabinet Position?

Hillary Clinton has been getting some unwanted attention as of late from those who feel she has been taking too much credit for perceived successes during her husband’s administration.  She has made claims of helping brought peace to Northern Ireland, negotiating open borders in Macedonia to allow refugees from Kosovo to flee, and standing up to the Chinese government on issues related to women’s rights, among others; oh, please… 

Actually, this is not much of a surprise.  It is probably the natural evolution of a temptation too great to resist from a former First Lady-turned-presidential candidate.  She was not, of course, an official cabinet member as First Lady, but having been First Lady for so long, one with political aspirations of her own, probably makes it easier to tell herself it’s OK to claim official decision-making experience that’s not rightfully hers.

I’ll let other people debate the veracity of her claims.  That’s not really what matters to me in this discussion; as it is, I’ve never granted her any respect or legitimacy as a politician, nor will I, even if the American people are collectively insane enough to vote her into office in November; accordingly, I don’t much care what she says at all.  No, the issue that matters the most to me, and one that surprisingly isn’t being discussed, is the proper role of a First Spouse when it comes to the work of the president. 

In any marital relationship, it is perfectly natural for husbands and wives to talk about what’s going on at their respective workplaces when they are at home together.  Fair enough.  That said, is there a line that should be respected which separates private in-home conversation about another spouse’s job from the expectation of spousal input in the actual workplace?  I’ve worked in many companies over the last 30 years, and will confess to wincing a bit when I hear things like, “I told my wife about what’s going on with so-and-so, and she thinks it would be a good idea if…,” or, “I mentioned what was going to my husband, and he can’t understand why we don’t just fire the client.  He said that in his company…”  It’s one thing when a suggestion is presented as an occasional and passing “Oh, by the way…” kind of comment, but quite another when the frequency and manner of the remarks demands that they be considered with much greater significance.  

I think it’s terrific when you can access a good idea.  I’ll take a good idea from just about anywhere.  That said, there’s a feeling of, “Hey, wait a minute…” that seems to creep in whenever you are hearing from a co-worker’s spouse so frequently you think he or she is on the payroll. 

The stakes, of course, are a lot higher when you’re speaking about the office of the Presidency of the United States.  If a highly-qualified politician successfully ascends to that office, what role should an unelected spouse have in policymaking and decision-making?  Laura Bush seems like a very nice, bright person, but I don’t really want her to enjoy the same influence and regard on policymaking as a bona fide cabinet member when she and President Bush climb into bed each night or sit down to breakfast. 

The aforementioned stakes are even higher this time around, where we have the possibility of a former two-term president assuming the role of First Spouse.  Not only is Bill Clinton a former president, he is well known to us all now as someone who remains very interested in world politics.  What should his role be?  Will he view his role as an ex-president/First Gentleman as something that delivers to him the right to be an activist within his wife’s administration?  Will she ultimately prove to be little more than a president by proxy, with Bill effectively serving a Constitutionally-disallowed third term as president through his wife’s election? 

What of Cindy McCain?  The prospect of her becoming First Lady brings up an interesting twist to this discussion.  Cindy McCain previously suffered from an addiction to painkillers, stole the drugs she needed, and reportedly still suffers some lingering effects from the near-fatal stroke that hit her in 2004. If these unfortunate features were characteristic of an active presidential candidate, would he or she not be dismissed outright?  If that’s true, then how much weighty input should that same person have as a First Spouse? 

Look, it’s been tough enough to swallow the lousy presidents we’ve had for some time now with the knowledge that they are, at least, the actual intended officeholders.  What we don’t need are First Spouses being accorded any sort of legitimacy as cabinet members, policy makers, or official decision makers in a president’s administration.  When I hear Hillary Clinton’s claims of “moving and shaking” in her husband’s administration, I concern myself not with how precisely accurate each statement is, but rather with the basic idea that it’s highly inappropriate for her to have an involvement at that level, anyway.  

What do you think?  Should the First Spouse be “seen and not heard” when it comes to the president’s most serious and official responsibilities, or do you think that the title of First Lady or First Gentleman affords the bearer the right to play an intrinsic part in the machinations of world politics as a representative of the administration?  Register your comments below.

Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Contributing Editor - www.ChristianMoney.com