WHO WILL BUSH CHOOSE FOR CABINET?

Given the late hour that the presidential election was finally decided,
President-elect George W. Bush has said that he will waste no time in
selecting top administration officials and Cabinet members. Expect key
announcements to begin as early as today.

There's good reason to move swiftly, but we're more interested in seeing a
high-quality administration that values limited government at home and
opposes U.S. meddling abroad than in watching a rapid-fire selection of
mediocrities. Signals out of Austin during the campaign and in the few
moments after its conclusion are decidedly mixed.

Many of President-elect Bush's choices will be no surprise - former Gen.
Colin Powell as secretary of state and former President Bush aide
Condoleezza Rice as national security adviser - given that they have had
leading roles in the Bush campaign and have been touted for these positions
throughout the election season.

Both Powell and Rice are highly skilled foreign affairs pros. We don't agree
with them on some issues, such as Powell's repeated pleadings for race-based
hiring practices and Rice's hard-line stance on Iraq sanctions, but they
would be excellent choices on balance.

There's much anticipation over Bush's choice for other key posts. After
eight years of Attorney General Janet Reno, a divisive and partisan presence
who has overtly politicized the office, nearly any fair-minded choice would
seem like an improvement.

Defeated Missouri Sen. John Ashcroft is a frequently mentioned AG
possibility.

Although he has solid limited-government credentials in many areas, Ashcroft
has a troubling record for supporting a stepped-up federal drug war, which
could mean more federal seizures and police actions on behalf of a failed
and nonsensical policy. We hope that Bush keeps looking for a better choice.

Frequently mentioned for secretary of Housing and Urban Development is
Stephen Goldsmith, the former Indianapolis mayor who was a pioneer in
privatizing government services. He would be an excellent choice for an
agency that rarely looks for private housing solutions.

For Interior, either Montana Gov. Mark Racicot or defeated Washington Sen.
Slade Gorton would be fine choices. Both men are Westerners who would be
less likely than the current secretary to undermine property rights and tie
up as much productive land as possible as wilderness areas. Former U.S. Rep.
John Kasich of Ohio, mentioned as a likely possibility for budget director,
would be well suited to the task given his bold proposals for tax cutting
and tax reform. For Commerce secretary - oh, forget it, there's no possible
excuse for having a Commerce secretary in a nation that is based on free
market principles where businesses should stand on their own. We should be
discouraging government intrusion in free markets, not expanding a
bureaucracy that helps only politically favored or politically savvy
businesses.

We're also concerned about the mention of Reagan-veteran Paul Wolfowitz as
possible secretary of Defense. Wolfowitz's hawkish views were understandable
during the Cold War years, but he would be the wrong man to lead the
nation's defense effort 10 years after the Cold War ended. America needs to
rethink its overextended military commitments, not find a way to upgrade
them.

For secretary of Defense, how about California's Rep. Tom Campbell, who ran
an unsuccessful Senate campaign against Democrat Dianne Feinstein this year?
He's one of the few prominent politicians from either party advocating fewer
overseas commitments, and speaking out against America's reliance on
economic sanctions.

We'd suggest that Bush choose a director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy who breaks out of the counterproductive "drug czar" mode. How
about New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson, a fairly conservative Republican who has
emphasized treatment over incarceration for simple drug possession, and is
an articulate advocate for a more realistic approach to the nation's drug
problem?

Bush will not appoint Cabinet officers like some of those appointed by
Ronald Reagan - men and women who vowed to eliminate the wasteful
bureaucracies they were appointed to head. That's too bad.

But if his choices will at least recognize the limits of government, and
emphasize privatization and common sense, rather than top-down federal
solutions, a Bush Cabinet still holds much promise.