School-Shaming Trump’s Cabinet

An article in the NY Daily News recently caught my eye. It notes that Trump’s cabinet picks are, by and large, far less educated (per the author’s measure) than the people they are replacing. Given the Daily News’ rampant anti-Trumpism (google “Daily News Trump Covers” for a taste), it’s no surprise that a News writer would find yet another way to disparage the incoming administration, despite the fact that it hasn’t even been confirmed let alone actually done anything. I read on, curious to see what the author concluded from this disparity, but before I got to the punchline, I read this howler:

It is often on college campuses where people are challenged with new ideas, new cultures, and opposing viewpoints that don’t quite match their own.

The author, Shaun King, must have just returned from an alternate universe. We are, daily, bombarded with examples of borderline-violent opposition to “opposing viewpoints” on college campuses. Non-liberal speakers are routinely disinvited, non-liberal faculty, staff and students are excoriated if they dare voice their opinions, and conformity of opinion is enforced by angry mobs.

Lets, however, move past that and consider the final conclusion: that many of Trump’s nominees don’t have experience working in government, and that this coupled with their sub-standard education “could be dangerous.” Dangerous to what? The status quo that has bloated government and fostered the nation’s decline?

Mr. King diminishes or dismisses the very real achievements of these “undereducated” nominees, with borderline derision for “billionaires” sprinkled on top. In doing so, he perpetuates, despite the obvious evidence, the trope that a top-tier education is a requirement for success. No matter that both history and Trump’s actual list is chock-full of people who didn’t graduate with PhD’s from Harvard and Yale but who managed to become incredibly successful anyway, it seems that we should be fearful that, without the good-liberalism-sheepskin-of-approval, Trump’s cabinet is a disaster in the offing.

I expanded on King’s list with some quick research into each Cabinet candidate’s education and work experience.

State: Rex Tillerson.
Education: BS, Civil Engineering, University of Texas.
Qualifications: Corporate CEO.

Treasury: Steven Mnuchin.
Education: Bachelor’s, Yale.
Qualifications: Corporate CEO.

Defense: James Mattis.
Education: BA, Central Washington University.
Qualifications: Four Star General, US Marine Corps.

Attorney General: Jeff Sessions.
Education: BA, Huntingdon College, JD, University of Alabama School of Law.
Qualifications: Alabama Attorney General, United States Senator.

Homeland Security: John Kelly.
Education: BA, UMass, MA, Georgetown, MS, National Defense University.
Qualifications: Four Star General, US Marine Corps.

Commerce: Wilbur Ross.
Education: BA, Yale. MBA, Harvard.
Qualifications: Billionaire investor, LBO specialist.

Education: Betsy DeVos.
Education: BA, Calvin College.
Qualifications: Amway Scion, Corporate CEO, Philanthropist, Charter School Architect.

Energy: Rick Perry.
Education: BS, Texas A&M.
Qualifications: US Congressman, Governor of Texas.

Health and Human Services: Tom Price.
Education: MD, UMichigan.
Qualifications: Orthopedic Surgeon, US Congressman.

Housing and Urban Development: Ben Carson.
Education: BS Yale, MD, UMichigan.
Qualifications: Pediatric Neurosurgeon, Presidential Candidate.

Interior: Ryan Zinke.
Education. BS, UOregon, MBA, National University, MS, USanDiego.
Qualifications: Commander, USN. Navy SEAL. US Congressman.

Labor: Andrew Puzder.
Education: BA, Cleveland State University JD, Washington University.
Qualifications. Corporate CEO

Transportation: Elaine Chao.
Education: BA, Mount Holyoke. MBA, Harvard.
Qualifications: US Secretary of Labor, CEO of United Way, Director of the Peace Corps.

Chief of Staff: Reince Priebus.
Education: BA, UWisconsin, JD, UMiami.
Qualifications: Chairman, Republican National Committee.

EPA: Scott Pruitt.
Education: BA, Georgetown, JD, UTulsa.
Qualifications: Oklahoma Attorney General, State Senator.

Ambassador to the United Nations: Nikki Haley.
Education: BS, Clemson.
Qualifications: Businesswoman, Governor of South Carolina.

Small Business Administration: Linda McMahon.
Education: BA, East Carolina University.
Qualifications: Corporate CEO.

17 individuals. 7 CEOs and magnates. 3 military brass. 2 physicians. And, notably, 7 politicians (so much for “no experience in government). Only 3 of 17, however, have Ivy League ties, which I surmise is what consternates Mr. King so greatly. So what? These are all people who have achieved great success in their professional lives, and we might argue that their lack of ivy-covered pedigree makes those successes even greater. To echo the article’s quote about racism – if their “lesser” schools meant they had to jump 6 feet vs an Ivy Leaguer’s 2 feet, doesn’t that speak even better of them than Ivy would? Plus, why would we value something that many of them would have earned 30 or 40 years ago more than we would value decades of post-college achievement?

It’s no surprise that Trump would pick fellow magnates to join his administration. It’s heartening to see that that’s not all he picked. If we are to judge him by his cabinet picks’ resumes (rather than pedigrees), we’d conclude he’s doing all right so far. Still, names on a list are not achievements, and what his administration does will be the real basis for judgment.

Despite being a critic of his during the election, and despite not having voted for him, I’ve accepted Trump’s victory, and am in a “wait and see” mode at the moment. Wait and see what he does as President. Wait and see what his cabinet picks do. Wait and see if they are given free rein, or if they are closely managed and directed by the Orange One. Caterwauling about his cabinet’s relative lack of educational pedigree in comparison with Obama’s is empty fear-mongering. These aren’t random names out of a phone book (although, as William F. Buckley suggested, we might actually be better off if they were).

School-shaming, especially in a time when schools have become borderline-toxic to free thought and diversity of ideas, is tendentious and offensive.