"Government Ill Executed"

Professor Paul Light wrote a great piece in Wednesday's Washington Post that should be required reading for this year's presidential candidates.

Light argues that the next president, be he a Republican or a Democrat, will inherit what Alexander Hamilton called a "government ill executed."  Over the past six months, for instance, America has seen her tomato crops contaminated, "toxic trailers, counterfeit Heparin, aircraft groundings, veterans' care, missing warheads and unrelenting contract fraud," among other troubles.

But the next president will also have to tackle the daunting task of organizing the White House's more than "64 discrete titles, including associate deputy secretaries, deputy associate undersecretaries and assistant assistant secretaries."  And don't forget the ever increasing role of contractors in Washington: this workforce "has grown from an estimated 4.4 million contractors in 1999 to 7.6 million today."

Light concludes that the presidential candidates must look at these problems not as anomalies, but as a "pattern of desperate concern."  With the retirement of the baby boomers from government, the time is right for the next president to reform the bureaucracy and create a more effective federal governing body.  Change is imperative not only for the next president's approval numbers, but for America's well-being.

-- Sebastian Ramirez-Brunner

Comments

[KSBR nervous]

This piece has a sloppy odor to it, beginning with a lack of basic facts. We'll stipulate the basic evidence of dysfunction that Light had in his op-ed. If anything, it is worse, and as pervasive as can be. Name an agency, subagency, or program that really works well and is cost-effective. No, don't bank on the PART ratings, although measuring is a great start.

Why would the post-er refer to the "White House's" titles. None of the cited titles are in the Executive Office of the President. They are in the cabinet departments, and yes there are too many layers. Fortunately, that part of the government's problems is crystal clear, in agency phone books or org charts. You can see the layering with no trouble. Now determining who is responsible and accountable--that's difficult.

Also factually, read Light's deeper research on federal contractor numbers. You can't square them with contract dollars or contracts. Several of his assumptions are, well loony. And many contracts are not denominated in labor hours or labor dollars. You can't tell--and there is no need to have the detail--how much labor is behind services like mowing the lawn or building a building or making a "thing" that the government buys. His numbers are inflated. He knows it, but won't admit it, in public anyway. He has been attacked for years by colleagues and others. That said, Professor Light's concepts and prescriptions are directionally correct.

Where we don't want to go is in the direction of adding federal employees, whose productivity is low and not getting any better. And they lack skills, even to oversee contractors, not to mention managing themselves.

Unfortunately, even though so much of the bureaucracy is wasting money and abusing us customers, it is not even in the top five things the next President needs to worry about. You know what the bigger issues are. Please go more lightly on the gratuitous words in the last paragraph. Don't be so breathless.