Your version seems plausible. Clearly to some large extent the explanation for his appointment is that things were crazy, Emanuel was running the show, they needed a Republican, transportation wasn’t at the top of the priority list, and so they punched his ticket. A preexisting or subsequently developing idea of appointing more of a visionary in that role wouldn’t surprise me though.

This question about how far ahead Obama is strategizing seems to come up frequently, I’m noticing.

-Jebediah

First of all, better to have a dispassionate “yes” man in the Administration than a passionate idiot (Administrations past have had their fair share). So in that respect, I agree with Jeb’s overall sunny outlook.

So why did the President fill his cabinet with people that have a demonstrated expertise in their respective departments (Chu for Energy, Geithner for Treasury), but did not do the same for DOT? I think it has to do with strategy.

I honestly think LaHood is warming the seat for someone else. With an economy in recession and two wars abroad, Obama had to prioritize, and I think he made a decision long ago that he wasn’t going to go full steam ahead on transportation issues until at least a year or two into his first term. As such, he picked a go-with-the-flow guy like LaHood, as opposed to a well-known expert like Jane Garvey or Mortimer Downey. Obama knows that we need a higher gas tax to keep the federal surface transportation program going, but he wants to pick that fight later on down the road (no pun intended!), and he knew a guy like Downey could not keep quiet on the issue.

So the question isn’t why Obama picked a largely dispassionate department head like LaHood, it’s who is going to replace him when the Administration feels the time is ripe to get serious on transportation?