Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Bush appointees hated big government so much they stayed,

Posted 2 years ago on June 22, 2012, 12:28 p.m. EST by brightonsage (4494)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Here is a clip from an article by Christopher Lee, in the Washington Post after the last election"

"And no matter how much some in the Bush administration seem to look down on government, no matter how many say they long to return to the private sector or spend more time with family, a few political folks, in the end, will decide that they would rather not part ways with Uncle Sam. So they will try to stick around, angling to turn their short-term stint in an administration of their choice into a permanent job amid the ranks of career civil servants and federal executives.

"Remember, not everybody who comes in is going to have a very high-profile job where they are going to be able to leave and make really good money," said Carol A. Bonosaro, president of the Senior Executives Association, which represents career executives in the federal government. "Not everyone has had necessarily a strong enough background to go back out. They may just have been a campaign worker."

"A merit-based federal workforce is essential to ensuring a competent and effective government that will enforce laws fairly across administrations," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

In the most recent report, released in May 2006, investigators found that 23 agencies hired 144 political appointees into career positions from May 2001 to April 2005. In at least 18 cases the agencies did not follow proper procedures, the GAO found, citing problems such as hiring appointees with limited qualifications, creating positions for specific individuals and disregarding veterans' preference laws.

In one case, for example, a confidential assistant to then-Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson beat out 52 other applicants for the newly reestablished position of policy coordinator in the secretary's office. The job appeared to be tailor-made for the appointee, the GAO said. The new and old jobs even had identical salaries, $57,550. Although the appointee received the highest numerical rating among applicants, the file contained no documentation to show how points were assigned -- and the person doing the hiring was the appointee's old boss. "

So, I guess we can believe all of the GOP small government guys this time when they say they are going to shrink government just as soon as they get settled in their new appointed positions in Romney's administration, right?

32 Comments

32 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I know, you were just about to say, "But Obama does it too."

Personnel agency cracks down on appointees ‘burrowing’ in By Alex M. Parker November 6, 2009

inShare The Office of Personnel Management on Thursday announced it will monitor movement of political appointees to career civil service jobs continuously to better protect against politicization of the merit system. In a memorandum to agency heads, Director John Berry said starting in 2010 all agencies must get OPM's permission before giving current or recent political appointees competitive or nonpolitical excepted service positions. The new policy applies to jobs at all levels. Previously, the personnel agency oversaw such moves only during election years, unless the appointees were transferring to Senior Executive Service positions. The increased oversight is designed to prevent a practice known as "burrowing in," where agencies allow appointees to remain in government at the end of an administration by giving them career jobs without making them go through a fully competitive application process. "In light of the historical origins of the civil service system, OPM's role as guardian of the merit system is especially important when a federal agency selects a political appointee for a position in the civil service," Berry wrote in the memo. "While political appointees may not be excluded from consideration for federal jobs because of their political affiliation, they must not be given preference or special advantages." The new policy defines recent appointee as someone who has held a political job within the past five years. OPM will check the appointments to "ensure they comply with merit system principles and applicable civil service laws." According to the memo, career senior executives will conduct the reviews to "avoid any hint of political influence."

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Then you would say, "Oh, but that was three years ago. I'll bet they have completely forgotten about that by now."

OPM head warns against 'burrowing in'

By FCW Staff
Jun 13, 2012

Watch out for burrowers, warns Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry.

"Burrowing in” is the slang term for political appointees trying to turn their positions into career civil service jobs so they can stay on even when a new president comes into office, or even when a first-term president gets re-elected. According to a report in Federal Times, Berry has issued a memo to the leaders of agencies to remind them that personnel actions must “remain free of political influence or other improprieties and meet all relevant civil service laws, rules and regulations.”

Source: FCW (http://s.tt/1ekxC)

Burrowing has long been one of my pet peeves, no matter who is doing it. It is another aspect of bad and incestuous governance. I am glad to finally have some evidence that it is being curbed.

[-] 0 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

Harvey Dent for President

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Put a little Dent in your pocket.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Pat Paulsen for President.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Smothers Brothers rule!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Goldie Hawn as secretary of state.

little old man on tricycle as head of defense.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

She was a cutie ( I suppose still is) That was Laugh-in which also ruled for as long as they were allowed to be on air. (like smothers brothers I think they had trouble with political controversies)

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

They were part of the 60's love movement. They were also commercialized to take advantage of connecting to young consumers.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Great shows. We are less political on network tv than we were at that time. Relegated to cable with the great Colbert/Stewart/Maher triumvirate

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Cable/satellite/internet are becoming the last bastions of free speech - and cable and satellite are also shrinking in good programming - and as internet is also under attack now by "the powers that be."

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

It is under attack but I think the genie is out ofthe bottle. And I think the internet may at least provide for a quicker success for any movement. I think it has played an important role in the recent uprisings around the world, and I think it can serve OWS and the 99% as well. If we get it together.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Yes and strive for healthy growth/change. We must have positive goals that the support of will heal our economy/government/business/country/world as we move forward.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Why would anyone be against this? And not attach a comment as to why they disagree.


[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (9515) from Coon Rapids, MN 37 minutes ago

Yes and strive for healthy growth/change. We must have positive goals that the support of will heal our economy/government/business/country/world as we move forward.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Agreed.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Spread the word people!

Promote the good that can be achieved to kill apathy and ignite hope and support and unity.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (9515) from Coon Rapids, MN 0 minutes ago

Why would anyone be against this? And not attach a comment as to why they disagree.


[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (9515) from Coon Rapids, MN 14 minutes ago

Spread the word people!

Promote the good that can be achieved to kill apathy and ignite hope and support and unity.

↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply edit delete permalink

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

We can't stand Pat!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

He was pretty funny on the laugh-in back in the day.

How about Larry the cable guy?

I would have suggested Red/Green but Canadian - no joy.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Colbert is probably the closest to Pat, but I miss the real thing.

[-] 0 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Colbert is great but he is faux right so not quite the same P Paulson

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

No, but he finds ways to make similar points.

[-] 1 points by VQkag2 (16478) 2 years ago

Oh yes. No doubt. I suppose he even fools some repubs that he is really right wing. Bush did choose him for the correspondence dinner. That was hilarious.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

One of the best they ever had. Now there are more celebrities than the Oscars.

Now, if Obama has just brought us the "Osama Bites the Dust" show live...?

That would have been a great finale for the West Wing series.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

George C might well have made a brilliant president.

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Corley? Hmmmmm?

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (34988) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Carlen

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

Oh, blue food Carlin. Of course. I was on George Corley Wallace and wondered if you had gone mad. Sorry.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Imagine how much we could shrink the beast, as grover demands, just fire the SEC, FDA, EPA, HHS

[-] 2 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

I have a feeling that if Grover got his demands, Grover would need more protection than Grover is willing to pay for.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Consider the cabal of grover + alec + blackwater-xe-acadami
or
watch soylent green
or
watch the recent mini-series borgias

[-] 1 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

They are reaching the point of diminishing returns. They have almost all of the money now. About all that is left for them is removing the aggravation. (That would be you and me.)

[Removed]

[Removed]