If the goal is to repair the damage DOGE has done and make government truly work efficiently, then you must start with government employees. Three things are needed.
First, you must rebuild the faith and trust that government employees previously had with their government. They accepted lower wages than comparable private sector jobs for a career in public service, in exchange for a good benefits and a promise they would not be fired without cause. The latter has been grossly violated. In addition, and particularly within agencies which promulgate regulations over industry, federal employees now work under the threat of being fired unless they (1) violate their own regulations and guidance to favor the industries they previously regulated, and (2) promulgate new regulations that conflict with statutory authorities. This has rendered their original mission of actual public service meaningless and perverted. The combined effect is that government service has become completely unattractive to all except those who are willing to do anything for a job. To the maga minions, this is fine because their puppeteers will it, but the end result is that the public good is largely sacrificed to benefit the wealthy and powerful.
Second, the public sector has always had some waste and inefficiency, which must be addressed. This has largely resulted from middle and upper management not having the will to fire underperforming and/or irresponsible employees because the process is so daunting and contingent upon subjective measures. Although the percentage of the budget devoted to government employee salaries is tiny, this issue is what republicans have always pointed to, and it must be reformed. The need for this reform should be acknowledged, be government-wide, and open and transparent to the public. In addition, this process of improvement must be regularly revisited, maintained, and revised as necessary. The end goal should be that the public has demonstrable evidence that that government employees are devoted public servants who do their jobs well and deserve their salaries.
Third, and most difficult, regulatory agencies must be better insulated from the destructive cycle of political interference from the executive branch. Few understand that all regulations flow from enabling legislation. Frequently, this legislation is specific as to what these regulations must contain. We must end the willful disregard of, and corruption of properly promulgated regulations by the succeeding administration. If a regulatory agency promulgates a rule, that rule must be followed and enforced, until and if, a new rule if promulgated to replace it. Obviously, addressing this one issue involves wider considerations involving the roles and authorities of the (supposedly) co-equal branches of government. And, the only obvious mechanism now in place that can be revived or reinforced to ensure this happens is the office of Ombudsman. Not all regulatory agencies have this position and the powers granted to it are limited and frequently emasculated. Strengthening this position or establishing another like it would be a good step forward.
The first and third points are correct, but I have to object to the second-- when MSPB has something like a 98% affirmance rate, it's preposterous to describe the firing process as "daunting and contingent upon subjective measures." The reason managers tend not to fire underperformers is that constant hiring freezes, threats of budget cuts, shutdowns, etc etc mean that fired employees usually will not be replaced timely, meaning that unless an employee has literally zero or negative value (which isn't usually the case even for poor performers) a firing hurts, rather than helps, the agency.
This is terrific! Please include Congress & the First Branch in your efforts. The institution is just recently reforming itself with modernization. District offices only got House wifi in 2023 and committees are still at 40% below 1980 levels of capacity. With Loper Bright mandating more precise lawmaking (Chevron deference gone). Congress is going to have to up its game significantly. Thanks for all that you do!
From my experience as a near-15-year vet of the federal government, almost none of the productivity-reducing barriers to agency performance were internal or things that the executive branch had any control over. Instead, they consisted of things like endless statutory appeals, deliberate footdragging by the right-wing judiciary, miles of legislative red tape forcing the expenditure of insane amounts of time on relatively straightforward rulemaking, and the abject refusal of the Senate to confirm qualified agency leadership such that the agency spent prolonged periods unable to take any action because it had no quorum.
So I am immediately suspicious of this supposed project. This article is nothing but generalities, which does nothing to convince me that the underlying project is not either hopeless, misdirected, or both.
If the goal is to repair the damage DOGE has done and make government truly work efficiently, then you must start with government employees. Three things are needed.
First, you must rebuild the faith and trust that government employees previously had with their government. They accepted lower wages than comparable private sector jobs for a career in public service, in exchange for a good benefits and a promise they would not be fired without cause. The latter has been grossly violated. In addition, and particularly within agencies which promulgate regulations over industry, federal employees now work under the threat of being fired unless they (1) violate their own regulations and guidance to favor the industries they previously regulated, and (2) promulgate new regulations that conflict with statutory authorities. This has rendered their original mission of actual public service meaningless and perverted. The combined effect is that government service has become completely unattractive to all except those who are willing to do anything for a job. To the maga minions, this is fine because their puppeteers will it, but the end result is that the public good is largely sacrificed to benefit the wealthy and powerful.
Second, the public sector has always had some waste and inefficiency, which must be addressed. This has largely resulted from middle and upper management not having the will to fire underperforming and/or irresponsible employees because the process is so daunting and contingent upon subjective measures. Although the percentage of the budget devoted to government employee salaries is tiny, this issue is what republicans have always pointed to, and it must be reformed. The need for this reform should be acknowledged, be government-wide, and open and transparent to the public. In addition, this process of improvement must be regularly revisited, maintained, and revised as necessary. The end goal should be that the public has demonstrable evidence that that government employees are devoted public servants who do their jobs well and deserve their salaries.
Third, and most difficult, regulatory agencies must be better insulated from the destructive cycle of political interference from the executive branch. Few understand that all regulations flow from enabling legislation. Frequently, this legislation is specific as to what these regulations must contain. We must end the willful disregard of, and corruption of properly promulgated regulations by the succeeding administration. If a regulatory agency promulgates a rule, that rule must be followed and enforced, until and if, a new rule if promulgated to replace it. Obviously, addressing this one issue involves wider considerations involving the roles and authorities of the (supposedly) co-equal branches of government. And, the only obvious mechanism now in place that can be revived or reinforced to ensure this happens is the office of Ombudsman. Not all regulatory agencies have this position and the powers granted to it are limited and frequently emasculated. Strengthening this position or establishing another like it would be a good step forward.
The first and third points are correct, but I have to object to the second-- when MSPB has something like a 98% affirmance rate, it's preposterous to describe the firing process as "daunting and contingent upon subjective measures." The reason managers tend not to fire underperformers is that constant hiring freezes, threats of budget cuts, shutdowns, etc etc mean that fired employees usually will not be replaced timely, meaning that unless an employee has literally zero or negative value (which isn't usually the case even for poor performers) a firing hurts, rather than helps, the agency.
DOGE failed because it was tech-first with little understanding of process. This suggested approach is better, but an insufficient improvement.
The proper phasing of product and process improvement for more efficient and effective government products is to:
1. eliminate;
2. consolidate; then
3. automate such processes.
This is terrific! Please include Congress & the First Branch in your efforts. The institution is just recently reforming itself with modernization. District offices only got House wifi in 2023 and committees are still at 40% below 1980 levels of capacity. With Loper Bright mandating more precise lawmaking (Chevron deference gone). Congress is going to have to up its game significantly. Thanks for all that you do!
From my experience as a near-15-year vet of the federal government, almost none of the productivity-reducing barriers to agency performance were internal or things that the executive branch had any control over. Instead, they consisted of things like endless statutory appeals, deliberate footdragging by the right-wing judiciary, miles of legislative red tape forcing the expenditure of insane amounts of time on relatively straightforward rulemaking, and the abject refusal of the Senate to confirm qualified agency leadership such that the agency spent prolonged periods unable to take any action because it had no quorum.
So I am immediately suspicious of this supposed project. This article is nothing but generalities, which does nothing to convince me that the underlying project is not either hopeless, misdirected, or both.
“An Open Letter …
A proposal for resilient government services that survive political cycles.”
https://ardeshir.io/nexus/