Poor Personnel
by Donald Devine

Politics! Right here in River City, Potomac River city that is, “a five alarm fire” of partisanship according to non-partisan Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), a political “stonewall” to that non-political head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). It is all so shocking.

What has raised the Democratic warhorses’ ire? There is political hiring and firing by the Bush Administration taking place right in the middle of Washington, D.C.! Imagine that. If only it were true. In fact, the Administration’s five month agony over its replacement of nine U.S. Attorneys is entirely due to its inability to engage forthrightly in political combat.

When initially questioned about the Department of Justice’s removal of the nine regional attorneys, Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty said they were dismissed for “performance related” reasons. Why? Like most politically tone deaf lawyers, he thinks there is something vaguely distasteful about politics so he will give any reason other than the legally appropriate one to explain peoples’ behavior. Of course, the Constitution requires that appointees be nominated by an elected president and must be confirmed by a political Senate. Politics is inherent in the American form of government, especially concerning personnel.

In the case of U.S. Attorneys, custom dictates a further political step. A president is supposed to obtain the prior approval of senators in his own party even before submitting the nomination, as Kennedy and Schumer well know and have benefited from. Firing? President Bill Clinton fired all fifty AGs at one stroke right at the beginning. As Schumer found in cross-examining an assistant to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, this was the original plan to start the second Bush term but, in attempting not to look too political, it was decided to only replace a relative few weaker links—leading to the whole present mess.

The case that raised the most hackles was the firing of David Iglesias of New Mexico. Schumer demanded to know why he was added to the replacement list and who recommended it. McNulty admitted he approved the addition in response to a complaint about his performance from Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) for not pursuing voting irregularities cases vigorously. But he was hesitant to defend this entirely legal and appropriate information from a senator from the same state about a policy the Bush Administration wanted better enforced, from a senator who originally recommended the official.

In spite of its legality, McNulty and his boss Gonzales feel guilty about “committing politics” and were defensive. If they merely said at the beginning, it is our right as executives to dismiss political appointees at will the whole thing would have been over before it began. But real pols like Schumer and Kennedy can smell the guilt and pressed their advantage. So the two neophytes wilted under the heat and an assistant, a pure innocent named Monica Goodling, was set-up for a brutal Congressional grilling. None had the background of political knocks necessary for competing with pros. Goodling was a mere seven years out of law school, Gonzales had spent his entire career as a legal assistant and appointee protected by George W. Bush, and McNulty has served the last 20 years in a government job.

Yet, when a Bush appointee has the necessary skills he is denied a promotion and shifted to a less prestigious position for doing his job too well. That is what happened to acting Assistant Attorney General Bradley Schlozman at Justice’s civil rights division. When he was appointed in May 2003, he “quickly became enmeshed in hiring decisions previously made by section chiefs,” as the Washington Post phrased it, from a leak made by five agency lawyers “on the condition of anonymity.” He also was accused of reassigning cases from staff attorneys he considered untrustworthy to those he considered reliable.

The career government lawyers did not like Schlozman challenging what they described as their “collegial work environment.” So they leaked to the Post that he supposedly said some political things such as he wanted to “make room for some good Americans,” which was characterized as racially motivated. He wanted new more conservative, perhaps more Republican, lawyers, which was “political.” What neither they nor the reporter mentioned was that the positions are not in the regular civil service but are under Schedule A where policy views are a legitimate consideration. And the whole justification for political appointees is that they are supposed to lead the careerists in the direction of the election-endorsed presidential program, which Schlozman courageously pursued, not allowing bureaucrats to collegially do whatever they want.

The Post unwittingly exposed the nasty way personnel policy really works in Washington. Reporters need careerists to leak news stories so they assist them in getting back at political appointees who take their jobs seriously and provide leadership. The political official is labeled the bad guy with the power who picks on the helpless career employees, who are called “lawyers,” “section chiefs” even “colleagues” in neutral and friendly terms. Actually, the political appointee is alone on the firing line while careerists are protected by innumerable bureaucratic rules and usually win.

Assistant AG Schlozman is gone and all five bureaucrats are still there or back after appeals to government agencies with which Schlozman’s superiors settled out of fear of being charged with “politics.” His replacement, Won Kim, promised Congress he would only consider his staff’s “talent, competence and ability” and “nothing else,” presumably including whether they are willing to take direction or whether their policy views were in accordance with the elected president’s. In other words, the “collegial work environment” has been re-established and the career bureaucrats are back in charge.

It is pretty much the same throughout the government. Six years after 9/11, the Bush Administration has not implemented the law to create a new mission-directed rather than career-protecting personnel system for the key departments of Defense and Homeland Security. The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit last month overruled one of the judges blocking implementation but the new House Democratic majority stepped in to reassert the career protections and undermine the reforms. Rather than threatening a veto, much less daring to implement the reforms immediately—it is the nation’s security after all--the Administration pledged to work with Congress for a compromise—of efficient protection against terrorism?

While attacking the Bush Administration for being political, Sen. Schumer had the audacity to place one of the civil rights division career employees in his office on a six month detail while she fought against her Justice employer--and won. The Administration not only did not complain but offered to compromise further. That is what happens when only one side knows politics. Sen. Schumer is a political pro and the poor Goodlings now staffing the Bush Administration do not have a chance.

Donald Devine, the editor of Conservative Battleline Online, was the director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management from 1981 to 1985 and is the director of the Federalist Leadership Center at Bellevue University.