Staffing DC - There Must be a Better Way

The replacement nominee for Commerce Secretary, New Hampshire Republican Senator, Judd Gregg withdrew his name from consideration. Citing ideological differences, it was in some ways not much of a surprise. The bigger surprise was that he was ever interested at all.

There must be some middle path between the extreme cronyism of George W. Bush's administration that brought us charmers like heckuv-a-job-Brownie and loyal-to-W-not-the-Constitution Alberto Gonzalez and the need-for-experience-and-competence backlash that has proffered a parade of insiders who need ethical waivers and look like Bill Clinton, part deux.

I think the notion that there is some identifiable "best" person to do pretty much any job is ludicrous. Lots of smart people with flexible, creative brains can do many jobs even when they lack traditional experience or training. The downside though is that coming into situations like that can mean that you generally can't hit the ground running and your learning curve can be steeper if you are coming into a situation where those who have been around that particular block resent you. While I respect the president's commitment to competence, I nevertheless think he could have employed more creative thinking about what competence looks like.

I jokingly suggested on twitter that I should be nominated. I have both an MBA and an MA in Political Science. I have experience with small business, big business and the census. But, someone like me would never be considered because I am neither a major campaign donor nor do I have any Washington DC experience or connections.

Unfortunately we demand that people dedicate their lives to developing those relationships and then castigate them when they work out too well. I just wish that instead of issuing waivers to much needed ethics reform, there would be a broader consideration of who is qualified even if they don't know anybody.

And then there is the confirmation process. Judd was picked in service of the notion bi-partisanship is some sort of holy grail. Just because John McCain offered that as some sort of major qualification in his run for president doesn't mean that it is a worthy goal. Judd couldn't give up being a partisan (starting with his demand that New Hampshire's Democratic governor appoint a Republican to replace him so as not to upset the balance of power nor make it any easier for the policies of the president at whose pleasure he would serve could get his policies passed) so his nomination if he had been confirmed would have just been for some worthless show. Obama has been frustratingly consistent in his pragmatic and non terribly ideological pursuit of solutions to America's problems. I have to keep reminding myself that he is doing what he promised when I long for him to apply overwhelming progressive force. He could but that is not what he told those who voted for him he would.

Plus there is that whole dog and pony show that comes after the 60+ page questionnaire where you have to allow a level of scrutiny into your personal life that many wouldn't give to their parents or spouse. Confirmation hearings have devolved into a game of "gotcha!" and senatorial performance art puffery with little regard to determining whether or not the person is qualified to do the job for which they are nominated. Of course they are qualified (unless they are not - Judd's lack of support for the Census and the office of Commerce Secretary itself - having voted to abolish it- made him suspect on that count). Senators just need to justify their role and maintain their partisanship by making it so grueling, petty and embarrassing that precious few outside the beltway would be willing to subject themselves to such a circus.

It is one of the reasons why, although I am a nerdy policy wonk and would love to serve in government, I find it difficult to imagine running for office or submitting to any consideration that would involve a confirmation process. The problem with the parade of tax problems of Obama's nominees merely indicates to me that the tax code is insanely out-of-control complex not that any of them might not be competent. Certainly there were plenty of issues as to how effectively they could serve in those roles which were, as far as I am concerned, tied to their lack of experience in the real world outside of Washington. Plus, when it comes to elected office we have the whole nonsense that came up in the last election of framing qualified as having held more years in certain offices or in proximity to them. (That said, the ability to buy name recognition and go from zero to U.S. Senate does not equal qualified).

But we are never going to get good, qualified fresh thinkers to ever serve if we don't learn to value those qualities, seek them out and stop the flogging for flogging's sake process of getting them in office.

Comments

[Catherine Taylor]

Maria. You ROCK! For this post, and for so many others.

'nuff said.

[Suzanne]

Right on Maria! (As always)