The United States currently has the largest number of appointed political officials at the top of any bureaucracy, and has only continued to increase over the past forty years; however, our governments overall performance continues to struggle. According to Kettl, “The vast number of appointments below the cabinet level poses the real problem, making it virtually impossible for the president elect to give the selections personal attention” (2015, p. 241). By filling all three thousand political positions with career leaders by civil service and merit processesses, it would most definitely possess both strengths and weaknesses. Kettl stated, “The quality of government can only be as good as the quality of the people who work for it” (2015,
…show more content…
In comparison, the experience level career bureaucrats possess is incomparable to that of a political appointee. The GAO stated, “These short tenures, along with commissioners’ differing priorities and management approaches, resulted in frequent changes of direction, diminished accountability, and little long-term operational planning” (As cited in Kettl, 2015, p. 242). Career bureaucrats are focused on long term goals, while also possessing a superior knowledge about programs that have worked in the past. Also, this approach would offer another strength by offering a solution to the issue of the rapid turnover of the political appointees. By staffing these positions with individuals who know how to do their jobs, are able to promote teamwork within their organization, and resolve the never ending staffing issues within an agency, one can ensure that the government’s performance will increase. Although this system would offer many benefits to society, it also possesses many weaknesses as well. Presidents have no apprehensions by appointing someone with whom they share similar policy orientations with, believe will loyally serve them, …show more content…
I believe it would be a good strategy to fill positions currently occupied by political appointees with career leaders and bureaucrats, which would result in improving our governments performance overall. Kettl stated, Carrerists, operating within an extended time frame, have a memory of what has worked and not worked in the past, an awareness of the long lead time from genesis of a program to its maturation, and an institutional loyalty and interpersonal network within agency and government that are uncharacteristic of most of the strangers recruited for political posts (2015, p. 253).
Top career officials are highly specialized and performing individuals who can offer a lot to help improve our governments performance. It has been agreed upon that the President needs individuals who share the same policy orientation, and will ensure their agencies responsiveness to presidential priorities, which is the leading argument behind why political appointees are needed in these positions; however, as Elliot Richardson has personally viewed under four cabinet departments of his career, career leaders are not trying to obstruct the President’s agenda. These individuals are motivated, not by financial gains or to promote their own plans, but to serve their country, and follow the direction of the President, as he was elected the leader by the people of the
In comparison, the experience level career bureaucrats possess is incomparable to that of a political appointee. The GAO stated, “These short tenures, along with commissioners’ differing priorities and management approaches, resulted in frequent changes of direction, diminished accountability, and little long-term operational planning” (As cited in Kettl, 2015, p. 242). Career bureaucrats are focused on long term goals, while also possessing a superior knowledge about programs that have worked in the past. Also, this approach would offer another strength by offering a solution to the issue of the rapid turnover of the political appointees. By staffing these positions with individuals who know how to do their jobs, are able to promote teamwork within their organization, and resolve the never ending staffing issues within an agency, one can ensure that the government’s performance will increase. Although this system would offer many benefits to society, it also possesses many weaknesses as well. Presidents have no apprehensions by appointing someone with whom they share similar policy orientations with, believe will loyally serve them, …show more content…
I believe it would be a good strategy to fill positions currently occupied by political appointees with career leaders and bureaucrats, which would result in improving our governments performance overall. Kettl stated, Carrerists, operating within an extended time frame, have a memory of what has worked and not worked in the past, an awareness of the long lead time from genesis of a program to its maturation, and an institutional loyalty and interpersonal network within agency and government that are uncharacteristic of most of the strangers recruited for political posts (2015, p. 253).
Top career officials are highly specialized and performing individuals who can offer a lot to help improve our governments performance. It has been agreed upon that the President needs individuals who share the same policy orientation, and will ensure their agencies responsiveness to presidential priorities, which is the leading argument behind why political appointees are needed in these positions; however, as Elliot Richardson has personally viewed under four cabinet departments of his career, career leaders are not trying to obstruct the President’s agenda. These individuals are motivated, not by financial gains or to promote their own plans, but to serve their country, and follow the direction of the President, as he was elected the leader by the people of the