Linda Chavez, Bush's nominee to head the Labor Department, has withdrawn her name from consideration for the post of labor secretary. Citing what she called "the politics of personal destruction," Chavez said that she felt that recent questions regarding her housing and possible employment of an illegal alien during the early 1990s had become a "distraction" for the Bush transition efforts.

The controversy arose out revelations regarding Guatemalan immigrant Marta Mercado. Ms. Mercado stayed with Chavez for several months in the early 1990s and performed housework on an occasional basis. Chavez also gave money to Mercado, also on an occasional basis, but insisted that the money was not payment for the household services Mercado performed, but simply gifts to a person in need.

The situation is less clear than the "nannygate" questions that derailed the nomination of President Clinton's first choice for Attorney General, Zoe Baird, in 1993. In that case, there was no question about whether Baird's nanny was an employee. That controversy centered around two facts: that the nanny was an illegal alien, and that Baird had not paid the employer's share of the Social Security tax on the wages she paid the woman.

Chavez had initially reported that she did not know that Mercado was an illegal alien at the time Mercato was staying in her home.

Chavez faced a tough enough confirmation fight even without the illegal immigrant controversy. Although at first glance, she seemed to be an example of "diversity" in the flesh. A woman, an Hispanic, a former Democrat, and a conservative on labor issues. She had taught Chicano literature at the University of California while pursuing her Ph.D. in English literature, and had been a member of both the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers. She was even a union lobbyist for a time, and served as editor of the quarterly journal of the AFT from 1977 to 1983.

With this background, Chavez seemed an ideal candidate for Labor Secretary, overseeing workplace laws on everything from wages and pensions to safety and job discrimination. But Chavez is also an outspoken - and high-profile - opponent of affirmative action, the minimum wage, and unions. As such, she found herself in the unenviable position of facing strong opposition from just about every "group" she was supposed to represent.

Chavez earned the wrath of many Hispanics with her opposition to multicultural programs, especially bilingual education. Although it's was not mentioned in the official resume distributed by the Bush transition team, she once headed an organization dedicated to making English the official language of the United States.

As an opponent of affirmative action, she had little support among women, who are the largest population segment covered by - and thus benefiting from - affirmative action policies.

Her opposition to unions, worker's rights and workplace safety regulations made her nomination anathema to union leaders. And Chavez's opposition to unions was likely to have an additional, less-obvious negative effect on women as well: Women are one of the fastest growing membership segments of unions; women in unions make more than non-union women; and union women are closer to both wage and benefit equality with men than non-union women.

According to the Washington Post, the AFL-CIO had been preparing to to oppose her nomination on the grounds that her policy stands on civil rights and labor law are so extreme that she is unfit to serve.

Chavez is currently the president of the conservative think-tank, Center for Equal Opportunity, an organization "devoted exclusively to the promotion of colorblind equal opportunity and racial harmony." According to the organization's web site, "the Center for Equal Opportunity is uniquely positioned to counter the divisive impact of race conscious public policies. CEO focuses on three areas in particular, racial preferences, immigration and assimilation, and multicultural education."

Next page > Tommy Thompson: The "Bright Spot"? > Page 1, 2, 4