Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution states that the Senate can confirm or deny presidential cabinet appointees and other executive positions by vote, a crucial check and balance that the Senate has over the executive branch. And a process that has sparked pivotal conversation between Congress and the public.
Two weeks ago, presidential candidate Donald Trump won the 2024 presidential election. His cabinet picks were announced quickly after—perhaps too quickly. Among them are former Florida representative Matt Gaetz for Attorney General, former Fox News host Pete Hegseth for Defense Secretary, former Democratic representative of Hawaii Tulsi Gabbard for Director of National Intelligence and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for Health and Human Service Secretary.
The concerns of Trump’s picks are within reason. Gabbard, Hegseth and Kennedy’s lack of qualification in their appointed fields is a major topic of conversation amongst the public, and Gaetz’ countless run-ins with the Department of Justice have brought much-needed skepticism to all the appointees.
Matt Gaetz is a name Floridians know well. His nomination as attorney general, the top law enforcer, is ridiculous considering the heaps of charges and investigations pending for him, including reports of having sex with a minor, accepting bribes, participating in sex trafficking and more. It is unbelievable that someone with a history of illegal activity is even considered for this position; the attorney general is supposed to uphold the law, not run away from it. He has been put under scrutiny various times by both the Department of Justice and the House Ethics Committee, which had stopped its investigation after Gaetz’ sudden resignation from the House. This stunt has led many lawmakers to demand the investigation reports to be displayed as part of the background check for this position which would make his confirmation an unlikely resolution.
Yet, Gaetz is not the only nominee who is facing concern for confirmation. Gabbard and Hegseth are picks that have stirred doubt from a lack of experience in their department. Hegseth was nominated to lead the Department of Defense after years as a journalist and Fox News host. For many, this candidate was shocking and unprecedented considering his minimal background in the military. While Hegseth served in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, that by itself does not show the needed qualification to lead an army of 1.3 million active members. In comparison, the current Secretary of Defense, Loyd J. Austin III has a 41-year career in the Army, was awarded the Silver Star for his leadership of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division during the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and served as Commanding General of United States Forces. The difference in qualifications is astonishing. The assigned overseer of America’s armed forces should be someone who has not only served in the military but also handled administrative matters that the role requires.
Still, Hegseth is far from last when it comes to inexperience. Gabbard does not meet the qualifications to be the next Director of National Intelligence—she has no previous experience in intelligence to lead 18 different organizations including the CIA, FBI and National Security Agency. And that is not the only criticism she has faced: she has been scrutinized by lawmakers for her controversial comments about Russia and Syria’s leaders. In fact, Republican senator Mitt Romney said Gabbard had accepted Russia propaganda as truth.
To further enhance the satirical feel of these nominations Kennedy Jr., a very well-known vaccine skeptic, was announced to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, a department with the goal of promoting and protecting health. Kennedy’s beliefs often contradict those of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, as he’s devoted to removing fluoride, a mineral used to prevent tooth decay, from the water supply. And worst of all, he has no previous experience in the health industry.
Bottom line, Trump’s picks are absurd and hold no real merit. The people he appointed are simply the right-wing yes-men he lacked from his previous term. For a candidate who repeatedly exclaims he will “make America great again,” his chosen advisors are clearly not the greatest that America can offer.
