What Experience Makes a Good President?

donna | 4/16/2008 5:18 pm | Daily Briefing

Hillary Clinton routinely touts her 35 years of experience as her biggest qualification for the presidency. John McCain points to his 26 years in Congress and says he is the most experienced. In comparison, Obama's 11 years in elected office earns him the label of "inexperienced". What experience are we looking for in a president, and how much is enough? Has experience been a good predictor of a president's success in the past? What experience do the candidates actually have and where are they lacking?

Experience in military issues and foreign policy his helpful, as well as exposure to a wide variety of domestic issues such as the economy, health care, law enforcement, energy policy, social services and the justice system. Experience in managing a large, complex organization and exposure to issues affecting state and local governments, as well as working on issues directly affecting average Americans is also helpful.

The March 10 issue of Time Magazine had an excellent article on the experience of all former presidents, with their years of public service shown graphically. A look through history shows now correlation between a president's level of experience in public office and their success as a president. Time points to the experience paradox, which showed that Abraham Lincoln was one of the least experienced presidents when elected and is considered one of our best presidents. The presidents who served immediately before him and immediately after, Buchanan and Johnson, were some of the most experienced, but are considered failures as presidents. Buchanan was the single most experienced candidate in history. He had many years in Congress, where he served as chair of the House Judiciary Committee and Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He also was Secretary of State. Yet, historians agree he is one of the two or three worst presidents ever. Chester Arthur, on the other hand, had no political experience whatsoever when he was chosen at a brokered convention to run with James Garfield. When Garfield was assassinated only a few months after taking office, Arthur became president and did a fine job. Success as a president appears to be more of a function of personal qualities such as temperament and intelligence and the full range of life experiences matched with what is needed at the time. With that in mind, what are the life experiences the three candidates bring to the table?

Hillary Rodham Clinton was an attorney for 17 years, focusing on child advocacy. She also was a law professor for two years and served on several boards with a child advocacy mission. As first lady of Arkansas for 12 years, she had exposure to issues affecting state and local governments and focused on rural health and reform of the state's educational system. She also served as a board member for Wal-Mart during this time. Her eight years as first lady for the United States took her to 79 countries and put her in charge of a major health care initiative. She has been a U.S. senator for seven years and served on the following committees: Armed Services; Environment & Public Works; Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, and Special Committee on Aging. Because her experiences as first lady are unique, it's hard to compare her to past presidents. She comes closest to Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy.

Senator Barack Obama was a community organizer in Chicago for three years, a civil rights attorney for four years and taught Constitutional Law at The University of Chicago for ten years. He served eight years in the Illinois State Senate and three years in the United States Senate. In the Illinois legislature he chaired the Health and Human Services Committee and successfully passed legislation regarding death penalty reform, videotaping of interrogations, ethics, welfare reform, and health care. In the United States Senate his committee assignments include Foreign Relations; Veterans Affairs; Health, Education, Labor & Pensions; Homeland Security; and Government Affairs. Like Senator Clinton, he has a long history of working in the law profession and has a legislative career giving him broad exposure to a number of foreign and domestic issues. A comparison to presidents over history shows that his experience is almost an exact match to Abraham Lincoln, who spent most of his career practicing law, with eight years in the Illinois legislature and three years in Congress.

Senator John McCain was in the U.S. Navy from 1958 to 1981, including seven years as a POW in Hanoi. Before becoming a POW in 1967, he was a pilot. After his release he briefly commanded a training squadron. From 1977 to 1981 he served as the Navy's liaison with the Senate, which was his introduction to politics. He was elected to Congress in 1982 and moved to the Senate in 1986. He has been in the Senate for the past 22 years. His committee assignments are: Armed Services, Commerce, and Indian Affairs. His career has given him a great depth of experience in military affairs, as well as issues covered by the Commerce and Indian Affairs Committees, but his breadth of experience is only to the extent needed to vote on legislation. The best comparison in experience is Gerald Ford, who had a distinguished military career and went immediately to Congress, where he remained for 24 years. (Ford, had additional experience, though as Vice President and House Minority Leader).

Each voter needs to decide what kind of experience matters most. Is it experience in elected office, or life experience? Does it matter what issues they were exposed to while in office? How do you compare 22 years in the Senate to seven years? Is each year equal in terms of gaining experience? Or is 22 years similar to seven years repeated three times? Is it a benefit to have experience at the state level in addition to the federal level? How about private sector experience? How do you weigh the individual unique experiences (community organizer, Constitutional Law professor, first lady of a state and United States, POW)?

Or, does experience even matter?

Time Magazine: Does Experience Matter in a President?

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1717926,00.html

blog entry tag reference

people | politics

go to Daily Briefing | Digg this story | add to del.icio.us | print | email