+menu-


Understanding WA DC Politics 1883-2017

Despite the host of management and organizational studies, Washington exposés and critiques of bureaucracy very little information is available about the working world, and everyday conduct of the top people in government.

June 25, 2017 There is no LEFT or RIGHT in my 937th comment, there is only the WRONG that has been progressively committed, against the best interest of American citizens by WA DC POLITICIANS et al, behind our backs, behind closed doors.

Despite the information available on the internet, very little information has been documented and provided to the working people in America, by the public media on the everyday conduct of the top people in the U.S. government..

To and for the understanding of a reasonable person, I submit the following

Understanding WA DC Politics 1883- 1952- 1977- 1979-2017

———————————————————————————-

1883 UNDERSTANDING THE CIVIL SERVICE MERIT SYSTEM?

 Approved on January 16, 1883, THE PENDLETON ACT established a merit-based system of selecting government officials and supervising their work. THE ACT ALSO MADE IT UNLAWFUL TO FIRE OR DEMOTE FOR POLITICAL REASONS EMPLOYEES WHO WERE COVERED BY THE LAW

—————————————————————-

1952 UNDERSTANDING THE PLUM BOOK?

The Republican Party popular war hero General Dwight D. Eisenhower and won the hotly-fought presidential contest, in a landslide with 442 electoral votes, ending 22 consecutive years of Democratic control of the White House.

After  Eisenhower was elected president, after the hotly-fought presidential contest, the list was written and published by the defeated Democrats in 1952

———————————————————————————

MY MISUNDERSTANDING “A GOVERNMENT OF STRANGERS”

Due to my ignorance,  on Nov  11, 2016, three days after President Trump was elected, my understanding of a government of strangers was the 7000 SES operatives permanently embedded in the U.S. government.  

———————————————————–

1977 – 2007 UNDERSTANDING A GOVERNMENT OF STRANGERS:

 EXECUTIVE POLITICS IN WASHINGTON?

Methodology: Interviews with 200 civil servants and political appointees from different departments and at different career stages.

Summary of Heclo: A government of strangers – From WikiSummary …

wikisum.com/w/Heclo:_A_government_of_strangers

Aug 14, 2007 – Political executive officers are supposed to guide and control, rather than … 1977. A government of strangers: Executive politics in Washington.

Overview · ‎Abstract: · ‎Question: · ‎Chapter-by-Chapter Notes

Overview

Abstract:

The book’s main objective is to explore the process by which high-ranking political executives and bureaucrats interact with each other in Washington. Political executive officers are supposed to guide and control, rather than merely reflect, the various interests in the executive branch. However, they are ill-suited to do so: they come to power being strangers and amateurs. Heclo studies the relationship between executives (presidential appointees) and bureaucrats (civil servants). The former are interested in political control, and the latter in policy continuity.

Question:

General research question: Can politicians guide what government does by controlling the people who do it? To what extent does appointment power make political control of the bureaucracy possible?

  • What are the implications of the politicization of the bureaucracy for political control (as embodied in political executives) and bureaucratic autonomy (as embodied in high-level civil servants) within the executive branch?
  • How do political executives (interested in political control) and bureaucrats (interested in administrative continuity, bureaucratic autinomy) interact with each other in Washington?

Answer:

High ranking civil servants strike a balance between the demands of political executives and bureaucrats. Bureaucracies pit the ambitions and plans of career bureaucrats against those of political appointees, who are at an organizational and informational disadvantage. Because the process of career advancement of high-ranking civil servants has been politicized, they may balance the demands of political executives and bureaucrats.

High ranking career officials who are part of a civil service system add a third dimension to the interaction between political executives and bureaucrats. They are supposed to be responsive to the legal authority of political heads, but they also have institutional responsibilities and a longer time horizon than the political heads. “The civil service idea in Washington may be a counterpoint for balancing strictly political and bureaucratic demands, but it rests on slippery foundations” (32).

Political executives can usually do better by evoking conditional cooperation rather than invoking their authority. (220) Conditional cooperation comes from developing trust with civil servants, building alliances within the agency and outside the agency (interest groups, media, other agencies, administration), and choosing strategically which goals to pursue.

Place in the Literature:

Sides with Seidman (1998), Neustadt (1960) regarding the power of the presidency and the constraints imposed by the internal structure of the executive. Does not address the issue of congressional dominance directly (thus, neither confirms nor denies). Discussion of “marrying the natives” suggests some degree of bureaucratic independence.

General Argument:

  • Presidential campaigns do not produce action programs that can be precisely legislated and then put into play by the bureaucracy.
  • Transition teams are likely to be poorly organized and political appointments (and the movements of their bureaucratic counterparts) are made after the fact.
  • Therefore, these decisions are made in haste under incomplete information. Under these circumstances, it is reasonable to believe that executives will use criteria on which information is available (i.e. political affiliation and service to the party or its members) as a basis for decision-making.
  • Higher-level staffing decisions, even within the civil service, become de facto political appointments (with political attachments to both the executive and relevant congressional actors, i.e. subgovernments and iron triangles).
  • Relationship of top civil servants and political appointees is therefore “smudgy,” i.e. not well defined. Because this relationship is not well defined, there is an absence of political and policy leadership within the bureaucracy. Political appointees “go native,” undermining presidential control, while bureaucrats are increasingly controlled by elected officials.
  • For this reason, policy implementation within the bureaucracy is not characterized by rational, hierarchical modes of interaction, but rather by establishing cooperation. This occasions the development of strategic planning and support-coalition formation.
    • The original purpose of the civil service is undermined.
    • Principal-agent relations are not clearly established and information is not efficiently disseminated.

Suggested shape of reform:

The establishment of a senior civil service (called Federal Executive Officers) in which rank is attached to individuals, not to jobs (unclear how this would bring about more predictable relationships between bureaucrats and political appointees, although it would make for the routinization of the post-filling process).

Methodology: Interviews with 200 civil servants and political appointees from different departments and at different career stages.

————————————————————-

1978-1979 UNDERSTANDING THE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE (SES)?

Overview & History – OPM

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/senior-executive…/overview-history/

History. The Senior Executive Service (SES) was established by Title IV of the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA) of 1978 (P.L. 95-454, October 13, 1978) and became effective on July 13, 1979.

———————————————————————

OPM CORRECTIVE ACTIONS REQUIRED?

“(c) If the Office makes a written finding, on the basis of information obtained under the program established under subsection (b)(2) of this section or otherwise, that any action taken by an agency pursuant to authority delegated under subsection (a)(2) of this section is contrary to any law, rule, or regulation, or is contrary to any standard established under subsection (b)(1) of this section, the agency involved shall take any corrective action the Office may require.

UNDERSTANDING 2014 VETERAN’S SCANDAL the 300 SES employees involved? Understanding why not “ONE” was fired and Understanding why they all collected their bonuses?  

——————————————————————-

2014-2017 UNDERSTANDING THE MERIT OF THE CIVIL SERVICE SYSTEM?

 IT IS UNLAWFUL TO FIRE OR DEMOTE OVER 9,000 (SES) FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE LEADERSHIP AND SUPPORT POSITIONS IN THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FOR POLITICAL REASONS

INDEED, IN 1883 THE  MERIT-BASED SYSTEM WAS  SELECTING GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS

AND SUPERVISING THEIR WORK.

—————————————————————

JUNE 25, 2017  UNDERSTANDING?

Trump 76: Plum Book 9,000 SES-GS jobs 1952 – 2016 | Darrell Smith …

https://www.linkedin.com/…/trump-76-8000-presidential-appointments-plum-book-d…

Jan 5, 2017 – December 2016: The Government Printing Office released the United States Policy and Supporting Positions (Plum Book) for 2016 on 5 Dec … The Plum Book contains data (as of June 30, 2016) on over 9,000 Federal civil service leadership and support positions in the legislative and executive branches of the Federal Government that may be subject to noncompetitive appointment.

———————————————————————————

The bottom line…..

June 25, 2017 There is no LEFT or RIGHT in my 937th comment, there is only the WRONG that has been progressively committed, against the best interest of American citizens by WA DC POLITICIANS et al, behind our backs, behind closed doors.

Comments are closed.