Return to Article: Obama calls for end of '20th century bureaucracy'
-
62755
All Cynthia Eisenhower (Gov. Vilsack's aid) and David Osborne (Public Stategies Group) did was take 85 million away from Iowa counties and cities and use it to balance the state budget. Of course Public Stategies Group got to keep $5 million for providing cover. The state budget is worse than ever.
-
58126
Dear GovtPCO,
Okay, you recommend we eliminate some of the few remaining balance-of-powers; consolidate more power at the executive level; perhaps even take more Constitutional rights away in the name of security...
And whom do you recommend the Electoral College anoint King this time?
-
58073
No candidate can promise reform, because it won't happen unless Congress lets it. The public has always overestimated the reach of the Executive Branch.
Real reform would eliminate a primary source of Congressional power.
-
57955
It is time for both parties to stop calling for government reform without first reforming the growing number of political appointees. It has gotten to the point where each political appointee brings in a herd of GS-15s on their coattails and instead of doing work for the people of the United States, these political appointees and their minions are either trying to get better political jobs or just responding to the latest poll numbers. It is time to stop punishing hard working, dedicated career employees because, too many political appointees cannot get their act together and act in the best long term interest of the American people.
-
57948
Several people have mentioned line item veto as a "solution". Line item veto power to the President is bad, bad, bad. It subverts the constitutional power given to Congress concerning appropriation of funds, and instead gives it to the Executive Branch. As we have seen over the last eight years, giving more power to the Executive Branch concentrates too much power in the hands of one person and his cronies. If we want a king, then scrap the constitution and give line item veto power to the President. Then he would run the government agencies, be commander in chief of the military, and decide what gets funded or what laws are enacted - i.e., a king.
-
57940
I am as skeptical about Senator Obama's capacity to deliver on his promises as he is about the government's. What has cost more money than anything else in reforming Government are the efforts by every new candidate who comes into office to turn everything upside down just to leave their mark.
-
57617
Vague promises on top of vague promises... Just say it. "I will bring back the NPR, bring back the Partnership Councils, and bring back procurement reform. I will bring back the CFO Council, financial audits and full cost budgeting and give OMB its clout back so that agency special interests are controlled again. I will enforce GPRA and I will keep that which is good - to include the mgnt scorecards and PART. I will not set an aritrary reduction goal of 343,000 Federal employees like Clinton did, but I will require that all commercial work be converted directly to full and open competitive contract, or otherwise be justified for in-house performance no later than September 2012. Oh, yes and to eliminate the single biggest barrier to gov't reform, modernization and the redirection of limited resources, I will impose a Line Item Veto." Whoever goes first, gets my vote.
-
57611
I thought "faster, better, cheaper" had gone the way of the Dodo bird.
"Performance based" is all about optimizing for the result you require...as it should be! Everything in the physical world requires a balance, and the way we run govt. programs should be no exception. Unfortunately, most of the time "cheaper", "better", and "faster", don't all end up on the same side of the equation at any given point in time.
-
57598
there is a reason he wants to go line by line, with his experience it would all be new to him!! So he'll be able to learn on the job what the Fed gov does. Couple that with a guy elected to the Senate when he was 29 we have 2 goons who have spent their entire lives on the taxpayer payroll
-
57596
The phrase, "a government that works better and costs less," also jumped out at me. Being part of the original National Performance review was THE most exciting and personally rewarding time of a federal career that's coming up on 27 years. NPR 2.0? Where do I go to sign up?
-
57589
So Obama wants a line item review of the budget. He had better learn how that process works first. His party, the Democrats, have blocked many attempts to institute a line item veto by the executive. It is a good idea, but it is unlikely to happen because Congress will not allow it.
-
57588
It was the National Performance Review and Clinton's antics that put procurement in the mess it has been in for years due to downsizing the procurement workforce. Beware the "promises".
-
57584
Deja'vu? I am a proponent of Government reform if it brings about effectiveness and efficiency that all speak about. But, let's not forget that to achieve many of these reforms, to truly make them work, will require a targeted monetary investment. We can't get better with the support systems we have, and modernizing them is expensive. Anybody check out the price tag on DoD's ERP investments lately? We didn't break it overnight, and we certainly won't fix it overnight. This will need to be an Executive and Legislative Branch effort. Some of what makes us ineefective are the laws and regulations that pile so mnay requirments, streamlining is out of the question. I still remember the stack of regs behind then President Clinton and then Vice President Gore that supposedly went away, but really didn't go away. Maybe we can do better this time. But if politics have anything to do with it, and they will, then maybe not. By the way, if Congress controls the purse strings and serve us the people, why aren't they already doing this?
-
57582
One big heartburn I have is when the newly elected official takes office they create unnecessary high paying jobs for their "friends." And don't forget all the new furniture for these offices. All at the taxpayers' expense. Waste, waste, waste!
-
57575
Part of government reform could start NOW with the Unions. John Gage and the like need to stop spending so much time trying to pad their resumes and do more to look after the needs of federal employees. The lack of action is why so many federal workers choose not to join.
If the Democrats want to make changes, they need to shake down the federal workplace from top to bottom. There are too many managers holding back progress.
-
57543
Both Obama and McCain seem inclined to get rid of the President's Scorecard Green Light/Red Light phony performance meausure system. This failed due to the "manipulation" of data to preserve executive pay and outcomes. Real success is measured in VA by excellent service to all Veterans, not just waiting times clinics or claims processing. Mandatory Budget for VA is CRUCIAL to VA success, not a scorecard!
-
57538
If elected President, Obama will end the bureaucracy as we know it. NSPS will not be a problem, punching in to burn off those last few sick leave hours will not be a problem either. Obama will simply contract out the entire civilian work force.
-
57522
(asking for a comment from a vet is like asking the devil for fire)
McShame will reduce federal civil servants.
No, I don't support the war or our military. I used to support the military, but if you remember, once we stopped supporting the military during Vietnam, we pulled out. It's time to get serious about departing Iraq.
-
57519
Vet, You bet I do. Clinton did and so will Obama. If you don't belive it then take a good hard look at the FAA today and then again 3 months after Obama get elected. You will see a world of difference.
-
57518
He's going to do all of this with a VP whohas been in teh Senate for the entire 20th Century?
McCain/Palin '08! THat is the change candidate!
-
57509
to Wise Old Owl "Our government should work for us, not against us," That does not soud like a desire for a partnership between his administration and CS.
-
57505
If Obama is going to do away with NSPS, outsourcing, and Union busting he could certainly be more clear about it. His talk sounds of the typical vague BS you would expect from any politician. Typically, I won't expect much in terms of "change" that developed in the womb of Chicago area politics. Check our record. We're not that big on reform or that fancy "good government" stuff here in Illinois.
-
57504
Considering the attitude this current administration has taken towards civil servants anything would be an improvement. At least Obama will include us in the conversation on improving government instead of shutting us out. McCain will only bring a continuation of the current failed policies.
-
57497
What about the young women who fall into fall into lives of crime and despair? Will he also give them government jobs?
-
57495
Obama continues to speak in generalities. What programs will be eliminated? Will Nancy Pelosi agree to let him do this?
"I haven't spent my career in the halls of Washington."
So will he bring us the 19th century bureaucracy of Chicago?
-
57488
He will junk NSPS and all other goofey "reforms." He will stop hating civil servants and bring us into a true partnership.
-
57482
OK DEMS...do you really believe that Obama is going to save you from NSPS, outsourcing, or union busting? I don't think so.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.