There is a saying, “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.” President-elect Barack Obama, like President Abraham Lincoln in the 1860s, is taking this adage seriously.

The president-elect is seriously considering political enemies from both parties to hold positions in his administration.

If it comes to fruition, you have to give the man kudos. That sure is gutsy.

It almost seems counter-intuitive; you would think politicians would want their own people advising them on issues since they would be more aligned ideologically. It would seem that if you fundamentally oppose the adviser’s viewpoints, then you may not take their advice seriously.

But I’m willing to give the man the benefit of the doubt. In a world that desperately needs bipartisanship and compromise, this looks to be a step in the right direction.

The question, though, is what positions President-elect Obama has in mind for these enemies. Are we talking secretary of defense — or even more important in this era on the verge of economic depression, secretary of the treasury? Or does he mean things like secretary of the interior?

Sen. Hillary Clinton, a rival of his own party, is rumored to be on the short list for secretary of state; Obama already chose Democratic rival Sen. Joseph Biden as his running mate and vice president.

Of course, a political rival within your party is completely different from a rival in the Grand Old Party.

After all, Obama’s liberal voting record in both the Senate and the Illinois legislature made him known by The National Journal as the most liberal senator. It could prove difficult for a very liberal senator to bring a conservative into his circle.

This is precisely what happened in the first presidency of our country. Though George Washington did not have a declared political party, he had both Federalists (modern-day Republicans) and Democratic-Republicans (modern-day Democrats) in his Cabinet.

Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican, and Federalists Alexander Hamilton and John Adams were often at odds with one another. In the end, the advisers were competing against each other to win over the president, which is rarely in the best interest of the country as a whole.

Who is to say that President-elect Obama will not face similar problems? If Cabinet meetings devolve into shouting matches and competitions to convince the president, is he really getting solid information?

I am a Republican and would love to see a Republican in the Cabinet. However, if that happens, two scenarios are equally likely. First, the one or two Republicans in Cabinet positions are systematically ignored because they were merely symbolic appointments in the first place. Second, the Cabinet members try to circumvent each other to be in the ear of the president, which makes the use of a Cabinet fruitless to begin with.

Neither is a particularly good option.

Technically, two other options exist, as well. It is possible that the rival Cabinet members will find common ground and be able to adequately and successfully advise the president. It is also possible that President-elect Obama will ignore all of his advisers anyway, whether they are rivals or not.

Only one of these is desirable.
All in all, bringing rivals into the group is a good concept. It didn’t always work for Washington, but it worked pretty well for Lincoln. Maybe it will work for Obama. Only time will tell.

Janne is not holding her breath for a solid Republican appointment to the Cabinet. Tell her why she should at janne.gaub@asu.edu.