Leon Panetta: A Model for Diversity Management

The ability to manage diversity is one of the most important skills a leader can have as the role of a leader functions to establish solidarity among people of different backgrounds.  One such exemplar of excellence in diversity management is Leon Panetta, retired Secretary of Defense, and civil rights Titan.  During his half century of public service, Panetta has strived to protect the rights of communities where injustice against them persisted.  His efforts have proven effective.  And even in retirement, his tenacity to establish and maintain equality among diversity is recognized, which begs the question of what inspired him to become such an effective leader.  The focus of this paper will be just that: the inspirations that led to Panetta’s political ambitions, his achievements with respect to civil rights, and how he managed to accomplish them.

Panetta’s inspiration begins at home.  His parents, Carmelina Maria (Prochilo) Panetta and Carmelo Frank Panetta, both Italian immigrants from Siderno, Calabria, instilled in him a strong work ethic.  His father came to America in the twenties to visit his brothers, but it was not until the 1930’s, after Carmelo had returned to Italy, married Carmelina, and returned with her to America to work that Leon was born.  Having visited one of Carmelo’s brothers in Wyoming, the couple moved on to California to visit Carmelo’s other brother, where they settled in Monterey.  It was there that, on June 28, 1938, that Leon Panetta was born.  Panetta describes the initial foundation of his work ethic occurring there: “My parents believed that child labor was a requirement in our family” (Bedard, 2010).  As such, one of his earliest recollections is of washing glasses at the restaurant his parents’ restaurant.  And as he increased in age, the work became more arduous.

In 1947, Panetta’s parents sold the restaurant and purchased a walnut ranch in Carmel Valley.  Panetta’s work on the farm, though menial, was physically taxing.  As their father would knock the nuts loose from a tree, Panetta and his brother would go from tree to tree collecting them.  Panetta recalls his father humorously describing the manual labor required of him as priming for statecraft: “…you’ve been well-trained to go to Washington.  You’ve been dodging nuts all your life” (Bedard, 2010).  And it would appear that his father was, in a sense, correct; the work ethic wrought under his parents’ tutelage certainly carried over into politics.  And though Panetta emphatically states that the fundamental values he learned from his parents, such as hard work, honesty, and moral cognition, were “a hell of a lot more important in politics than a lot of other things were” (UC Berkeley, 2000, p. 1), he was certainly influenced by other models of conduct.

In school, Panetta was heavily influenced by a Mr. Watkins, whom Panetta studied under in the class, “Problems in Democracy”.  As the name suggests, the learning objectives of the class pertain to the ever present facets in a democratic system through both lecture and analysis of current events.  Panetta recollects Mr. Watkins ability to maintain interest, but what was most inspiring about him, was his uncanny objectivity.  In a “Conversation with History” interview (2000), Panetta describes him as “…a great influence because he always presented a balanced approach.  He never went off one way or another, but he presented the picture, and he did it very well” (UC Berkeley, p. 1).  The critical objectivity and political interest yielded from Mr. Watkin’s pedagogical style, is certainly apparent in Panetta’s decision making later in life, and can perhaps assume partial credit for Panetta’s decision to enter in the political arena.

This type of critical thinking was only strengthened in Panetta while in secondary school.  He graduated magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts from Santa Clara University, which was directly followed by a law degree.  During his time in law school, Panetta honed the skill he calls legal thinking: "The whole process of analyzing a case, a factual situation, looking at both sides, looking at what the facts are, looking at what the legal arguments are, looking at what applies in the situation, and then the capacity to argue a position for or against something, based on what you can determine are the facts in law: the process is invaluable in politics… (UC Berkeley, 2000, p. 2). Indeed, legislation requires a great deal of analysis, argument, cumbersome choices, and more argument.  And many such critical analyses, decisions and arguments can be seen throughout Panetta’s career, none more apparent than his incessant travail for civil rights.

Following school, prior to his nomination for Secretary of Defense, Panetta had quite the political journey.  After his two year career as an Army Intelligence officer (1964-1966), the performance of which earned him the Army Commendation Medal, and a promotion to 1st Lieutenant, he served a number of billets.  These included special assistant to Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Robert Finch and executive assistant to Mayor John Lindsay of New York (PBS, 1996), but the first, and perhaps the one he was most positively influenced by, was his position as legislative assistant to Senator Thomas H. Kuchel of California.  “The fundamental reason we are here,” Panetta recalls Kuchel telling him in his indoctrination, “is to serve the public interest of the citizens of California” (UC Berkeley, 2000, p.2 ).  Kuchel’s influence on Panetta derives its strength from the fact that he meant those words.  Panetta’s recollection as Kuchel as his role model is best summarized in Panetta’s own words: “…he made decisions based on what he thought was right for the people.  He voted for civil rights…offended an awful lot of people in his own party, but did it because he thought it was right” (UC Berkeley, 2000, p. 2).  It would seem obvious then, to any who have followed Panetta’s amazingly successful, though highly polemical career, that Kuchel left a portentous dent.

The first example of Kuchel’s, and all previously mentioned influences to Panetta’s career, is his service under Nixon.  Panetta’s service to the Sec. of HEW, Robert Finch, was followed very swiftly by his appointment as the Director of Civil Rights.  Entering into this service in the latter half of 1969, Panetta’s main goal was to enforce the 1954 Brown .v Board of Education ruling which prohibited de jure segregation in schools in districts that had not yet abided.  Despite the unanimously decided Supreme Court decision, as well as several rulings that followed, a number of southern schools continued to enforce segregation whilst continuously pleading for more and more time to effect the change.  Due to pressures from the administration, Panetta faced a difficult choice, concerning which he states, 

In politics there has to be a line beyond which you don’t go—the line that marks the difference between right and wrong, what your conscience tells you is right.  Too often people don’t know where the line is.  My family, how I was raised, my education at SCU, all reinforced my being able to see that line. (Santa Clara Law, 2010)

Because Panetta chose to enforce the law, more quickly than Nixon’s southern strategy would have preferred, he was forced to resign (C-Span, 2007).  Panetta later published his reflections on the frustration of working under the Nixon administration in his memoir, Bring Us Together: the Nixon Team and the Civil Rights Retreat, a title that ironically plays off the infamous Nixon campaign slogan.  But despite the unmanageable circumstances that led to his being sacked, and indeed, offending an awful lot of people, Panetta persevered—though from a different direction.

It was soon after this that Panetta concluded that the increasing rigidness of the Republican Party necessitated his removal from it, a decision that would prove intensely prolific for his career, given his more progressive sentiments.  In his own words, “rather than taking knives out of my back, the Democratic Party at least allowed for a larger tent, in terms of different viewpoints” (2007).  Indeed, the diversity of the Democratic Party would prove conducive to Panetta’s position concerning equal rights.   Following his service for the Republican Mayor of New York, John Lindsay, both Panetta and Lindsay switched party affiliations.  Subsequent to his sabbatical from Washington, during which he practiced private law for five years, Panetta was voted in to Congress to represent California’s 16th (now 17th) District; and served eight terms.  During which time, he authored several legislative bills, including the Hunger Prevention Act of 1988, and the Fair Employment Practices Resolution, effectively expanding civil rights bulwarks to House employees (Santa Clara Law, 2010).  He also contributed to the extension of Medicare/Medicaid benefits to hospice care (2010).  Yet these were small accomplishments compared to what he would accomplish later.

Panetta left Congress to serve the Clinton administration, where his experience proved invaluable, but it is under the Obama administration that his embrace of diversity and victorious fight for civil rights will be remembered forever.  He served as both the unlikely CIA director, and Secretary of Defense, a testament of both Obama’s and Congress’ respect for him.  And even while working as head of the CIA, he worked to increase diversity among the agency’s workforce (HBCU Digest, 2011).  The nature of these positions dictated that his concerns shift toward intelligence and military policy, but his faithful embrace of diversity remained.

During his tenure as Secretary of Defense for the Department of Defense, Panetta was instrumental towards establishing equal rights for the LGBT community within the military.  Similar to conditions under Nixon, at least in regards to his facing vast criticisms, dissimilar in that such criticism were extraneous to the administration, Panetta remained a firm advocate of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) Repeal Act.  The policy itself was first introduced during Panetta’s service under President Clinton, as a compromise to end the all-out prohibition of gays entering the military.  The ensuing debate is described by NBC News (2008) as having “divided service members and veterans, put Democrats on the defensive and provided cannon fodder for social conservatives and Republican critics…” (NBC News, 2008).  Despite the ongoing controversy, right up until the policies end, the repeal of the act was one of Panetta’s first major acts as Secretary of Defense.  Also like his service under Nixon, existing measures towards desegregation, this time of course, of sexual orientation, put in place by his predecessor, Robert Gates, were intended as gradual steps, more titular than anything else.  This time however, the President’s goals were aligned with his, and on July 22, 2011, President Obama, Panetta, and Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen submitted certification of the acts repeal to Congress, effectively resulting in the act’s demise (Bumiller, 2011).  The following Pride month, further demonstrating his embrace of diversity, Panetta took the opportunity to express his gratitude for the enduring service of the LGBT community in the military: the repeal of DADT “proved to the Nation that just like the country we defend, we share different backgrounds, different values, and different beliefs—but together, we are the greatest military force in the world” (Capehart, 2012).  Panetta’s contributions to this civil rights victory would go down in history, but they too, would not be his last.

The most recent milestone reached by Panetta, just prior to his retirement from office, is the abolishment of the ban on women in combat.  This controversial nature of this struggle in particular, seems to surpass that of any of Panetta’s previous endeavors, with even the population in question, that is to say, women, among the ranks of the opposition.  Yet it is the same philosophy that caused Panetta to strike at DADT, that held him to opposing discrimination in general: to quote his words, “Our purpose is to ensure the mission is carried out by the best qualified and most capable service members, regardless of creed and beliefs” (O’ Toole & Wood, 2013).  Panetta went on to say that “If members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job—and let me be clear, we are not reducing qualifications—then they should have the right to serve, regardless of creed or color or gender or sexual orientation” (Votava, 2013).  The repealing of the combat-ban for women, rooted in the 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule, like all of Panetta’s civil rights battles, was fought and won in the name of equality where differences exist—differences that Panetta not only cherishes, but encourages others to cherish as well.

Recapitulation of Panetta’s career-long encouragement of diversity and fight for equality begins with his inspirations.  His education, teachers, and other role models, while teaching him valuable skills such as objectivity, and critical thinking, come second to the love, honesty, hard work, and morality instilled in him by his parents.  Panetta’s first civil rights case, under Nixon, or perhaps more appropriately said, against Nixon, was for the desegregation of blacks and whites in schools.  He fought for civil rights in the work force, and in medical coverage, and even in the CIA.  He is most known for his contributions to repeal “Don’t ask, don’t tell,” as well as lifting the ban on women in combat.  Panetta describes his ability to deal with pressure, chaotic political debates, and all out opposition as deriving from the values he received from his parents, the instruction of his teachers, and treating everything as negotiable (Baker, 2011).  His approach to diversity is a simple one: work with the differences.  His eagerness to accept differences, no doubt at least partially deriving from the fact that his parents were immigrants, is expressed throughout his entire political career.  Both his commitment and success in protecting the equality of liberty will accompany the events he helped forge in the pages of history.

References

Baker, P. (2011, October 23). Panetta’s Pentagon, without the blank check. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/us/at-pentagon-leon-panetta-charts-change-of-course.html?pagewanted=all

Bedard, P. (2010, September 7). CIA Chief Leon Panetta's nutty background. US News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2010/09/07/cia-chief-leon-panettas-nutty-background

Bumiller, E. (2011, July 22). Obama ends Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/us/23military.html

C-SPAN. (2007, May 23). Leon Panetta oral history interview. C-SPAN Video Library. Retrieved from http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/300771-1

Capehart, J. (2012, June 15). Panetta comes out for gay troops. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/panetta-comes-out-for-gay-troops/2012/06/15/gJQArI2teV_blog.html

HBCU Digest. (2011). CIA director Leon Panetta addresses morehouse community on workforce diversity. Retrieved from http://hbcudigest.com/cia-director-leon-panetta-addresses-morehouse-community-on-workforce-diversity/

NBC News. (2008). Admirals, generals: Let gays serve openly. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27774058/page/2/#.Ud_P-UHVBhU

O'Toole, M., & Wood, D. (2013, January 24). Leon Panetta clears women for combat, declares right to fight. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/24/leon-panetta-women-combat_n_2541847.html

PBS. (1996). A biography of Leon Panetta. PBS: Public Broadcasting Service. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/bio/panetta_bio.html

Santa Clara Law. (2010). Leon Panetta . Retrieved from http://law.scu.edu/lawyerswholead/leon-panetta/

UC Berkeley. (2000). Conversation with Leon Panetta; conversations with history. Retrieved from http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Panetta/panetta-con0.html

Votava, J. (2013, January 24). US military to permit women to serve in combat units. JURIST - Legal News and Research. Retrieved from http://jurist.org/paperchase/2013/01/us-military-to-permit-women-to-serve-in-combat-units.php