I don't think that the notion of a business leader in this post should be discounted because of the prior holders of this post - each should be judged on their merits. I think we've just had bad luck.

Whilst I don't know Mr Schmidt personally, I have known of him since the dawn of Google and he has presented himself as someone who not just understands the bookkeeping of business, but also the policy of the business environment. If he could do for the US bottom line in 15 years anything close to what he did for Google, I think we would be in very good hands.

I agree that prior posts should not 'discount' selection of a business leader - on the contrary - employment history, especially regarding such a specific role, should be of utmost importance.

Yes, certainly his business credentials prove he is a very worthwhile candidate. Should this be the only factor for consideration? We see street posters every day with new leaders claiming to be the best, claiming to have the answers we seek.

Mr Schmidt has been a major player in a pivotal phase of the information age.
The question is will he have the right answers to govern?

to take a leaf from Eamonn Fingleton's ( and Mr Prestowitz's ) tree
a good Commerce Secretary wears many hats and answers to
many more stakeholders than just F500 CEO's - downstream
suppliers, workers, taxing authorities and schools ( who need the revenue ),
producers who need effective customs enforcement, etc, etc

in fact, past Commerce Secretaries HAVE done a good job -
for business "defined as F500 CEO's", allowing them to offshore production,
eliminate costly and pesky investments in R&D, pursue the butterfly
of Chinese market penetration, defang customs and tariff enforcement for
fear of annoying the barking dragon and invoking retaliation for chimerical markets
that don't exist, and generally take the easy route to maximizing share price, etc, etc
the fact that mid-sized business, suppliers, the 3-5 jobs that follow-on
from one export job, etc, etc were decimated in the process, is just collateral damage
and they should just be retrained to "sell poetry" as one CEO put it

for their "economic miracle" periods Japan fielded a team of lawyers, Korea
fielded a team of engineers ( by and large ) for "commerce" who managed at times with "tough love" as they say, but definitely had a vision beyond quarter to quarter
profitability ( Nissan, LG, etc )
a quick glance at the technical stats for internet bandwidth and cell service in
J,K, and the USA will show you the difference between business "leadership"
and governmental leadership

Mr Schmidt brings a lot more to the table than past candidates, including a
sharpened appreciation for Queensberry rules, which alone is probably worth appointing him .. hopefully he will be able to make the adjustment from single
company, zero-sum focus, to multiple constituencies, and have the wisdom
to ignore those who have up till now spoken the loudest and spent the most
and put our commerce where it is today