Skip to comments.Tenured Partisans: The promise of employment for life has bred corruption in the civil service
Posted on 07/21/2014 7:33:02 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Something has gone wrong in our civil service. Consider some recent developments. The IRS was forced to pay the National Organization for Marriage $50,000 for leaking the groups donor list. Tea-party organizations and donors were much more likely than others to be audited by the IRS. This misbehavior was not the work of a few rogue employees in Cincinnati. In general, the IRS stalled tea-party applications for status as 501(c)(4) groups.
Meanwhile, April Sands, an employee of the FEC, recently pleaded guilty to violating the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from campaigning at the office. Ms. Sands, who worked in the office charged with enforcing our election laws, recently said, I just dont understand how anyone but straight white men can vote Republican. What business does such a person have in that office in the first place? Somehow the FEC managed to wipe her computer clean, weakening the case against her. Perhaps that answers our question. These cases reflect a larger pattern. Our civil service is putting a thumb on the scale of justice.
Thomas Jefferson described the ideal this way in 1776: Let mercy be the character of the lawgiver, but let the judge be a mere machine. Justice is blind. The law applies equally to all, regardless of their religious or political beliefs, their wealth or poverty, or their race. Moreover, it applies to government and the governed equally. Judges make this clear in their oath to administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich. That principle applies across government. Jefferson continued: The mercies of the law will be dispensed equally & impartially to every description of men; those of the judge, or of the executive power, will be the eccentric impulses of whimsical, capricious designing man.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
I kinda disagree with this guys premise. What happened with the IRS isn’t the result of some employees getting comfortable enough with their protected positions that they felt safe in taking partisan action.
What happened with the IRS was deliberate infiltration, over many years, by partisan ideologues/zealots. Who, upon reaching hiring manager positions made sure that people who believed as they did were hired and advanced/promoted.
Term limits for public sector jobs.
Even most of our military men leave the service after 10 or 20 years
Makes me chuckle every time.
Someone has figured out people don't like bureaucrats very much.
your right, he’s wrong
If anyone has any doubt, just look at the colleges and universities.
Dems have always been pro-government. This has endured them with your rank and file government worker.
The only cure: Get the public sector unions out of government.
This will not be easy because the democrats DEPEND upon these unions to fund them.
When are we going to stop the unions’ tyrannical rule over our local, county, state and federal governments ..??
Antonio Gramsci’s long march through the institutions, in action.
Yes, but they have infiltrated these departments because of the backing of the UNIONS .. and the UNIONS don’t allow anybody to be fired.
It’s a permanent job .. because when you get caught doing something you shouldn’t, you are just moved to another dept. How’s that for job security ..??
And .. this is the same scheme that is used in our schools. When a bad teacher is exposed, they are just moved to another school. But ..... these people are “for the children” ..????????
Not the plumber, the carpenter, the electrician or the lawn maintenance guy, etc.! AND THEY KNOW IT!
“I noticed the fedgov has been running commercials trying to improve the image of civil servants. Something along the lines of ‘we work for you’.”
TERM LIMITS! TERM LIMITS! TERM LIMITS! Why are we allowing the same people to stay for the length of their working lives at our expense? If we limit the upper class in government, then we would have more people of both classes in the lower jobs.
The point has been raised that civil service is a job
for life, and as a former civil servant, the premise
If your performance reports are 3 out of a 5, your
supervisor has no merits to explain for a higher
rating, nor demerits for a lower rating, just
write, “I concur”, sign and date it. You, then, may
accumulate a series of these, and are truly,
untouchable, by virtue of not an occasional
uptick or downtick, to raise an eyebrow!
Now, since the federal union representatives are
part of the performance appraisal loop, along
with your supervisor, do you really think that
you may ever see a demerit performance
rating???? The union reps have their golden boys,
So, yes, your civil servants, are going to occupy
that desk, until they are carried out, feet first, as
did happen, in my office.
You only get raises on demand when the workers and managers belong to the same union.
What if public “service” jobs were unpaid. You volunteer for your country. Then only those with both decent other incomes and a willingness to work for nothing (else) would do it. I doubt most welfare recipients would want to do so. What I don’t know is how many psychopaths would.
I meant that as a private citizen, the only people I actually employ, are the guys who come and do work around the house.... if they felt like raising THEIR prices JUST because they felt they were ‘entitled’ to more BUT have done NOTHING to actually EARN more, then I’d replace them with guys who could do the same work at a reasonable price.
But none of that is applicable in the world of the government bureaucrat - they negotiate with each other for salary increases and then demand the taxpayers underwrite their contract.
Welcome to the USSA, comrades!
The Perpetual Progress Party demands perpetual apparatchiks!
Me too. IBM used to have lifetime job security. It didn't make them corrupt. Liberalism made these government workers corrupt.
The author did an excellent job of identifying the problem, but the solution goes begging.
As a career federal government employee for 36 years (retired), I can vouch for the premise that the majority of government employees lean left politically. Why is that? To me, it is quite obvious. The Democrats are the party of Big Government, ergo most government employees have a vested interest in supporting the Democrats rather than a party that supports smaller, limited government. The Republicans are seen as the enemy.
The Democrats and public employees at all levels of government have a symbiotic relationship. The Democrats support increased benefits for public employees in return for political support including campaign contributions. Public employee unions endorse and fund Democrat politicians who, in turn, provide and protect public employee benefits. Unless we change that relationship I see little hope in fixing a very real problem.
The real danger is a partisan administrative state that has enormous control over the lives of the citizens and will manipulate data to achieve political objectives. Even if the Republicans were able to seize the reins of government, they would be faced with a partisan bureaucracy that will resist change and undermine their efforts thru delay and damning leaks to the media.
The Pendleton Act was supposed to eliminate political patronage in filling government jobs and to go to a merit based system. The Act did not foresee the rise of public employee unions, which have become a substitute for patronage. The first step in addressing a partisan civil service is to eliminate public employee unions.
Or dragged out kicking and screaming by their victims in the public when they've finally had enough!
Excellent post, thanks.
Consevatives should really be seeking out and applying to Federal positions. Sure, we’d all like a smaller government, but it makes no sense for that to be any sort of impediment to getting Conservatives into available positions.
There’s an excellent opportunity right now in that the Gvt is giving all sorts of hiring preferences to veterans, who tend to be both more Conservative and less corruptable to begin with.
I doubt that hiring more conservatives would change the inherent bias for Big Government and the Democrats. Anyone who espouses limited, smaller government will find himself a minority within the the public employee community. It is in one’s vested interest to support the Big Government advocates.
I think there’s a window of opportunity to change that, based on two factors.
First is the aging out of the current Federal workforce. Thanks to Reagans hiring freezes the Civil Service is much older than the workforce in general, and the last several years have seen the expected tsunami of Federal retirements start to come to fruition. The 60s and 70s Big Government Liberal Baby Boomers are really starting to check out in numbers.
Second is that, despite Obama’s goal of making government service cool again, the Millenials who are needed to replace the exiting Boomers are really disinclined to see Federal Service as a career path. Not only because Civil Servants and service has a bad rap, but also because with their more laissez fare take on work/life Millennials aren’t tempermentally suited to the constraints and restrictions of a classic government bureaucrat desk job.
The way I see it, there’s a once in a generation, perhaps once in a lifetime opportunity to get Conservatives into government service, where they can refocus from Government doing “good things” (a very subjective thing) to basic good Government (which is much more objective in nature).
Good luck with that! The AFGE is one of the most
Oh, I forgot to tell you. The union reps are
federal employees, doing their union stuff,
instead of their official position, during
the work day, and still getting paid by YOU!