Confirmations and Continuity

...Obama is already on the ground and running...

Despite all the verbiage spilled this election, I've encountered no mention of the challenge that faces every new president of naming top administrators – secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant secretaries and deputy assistant secretaries, plus Executive Office staff, from the direct assistants to the president to the Council of Economic Advisors and other appendages. New Presidents also face a steep learning curve on operational matters, from dealing with intelligence briefings and to establishing personal ties (or not!) with key Congressional leaders.

The "Plum Book" drawn up every 4 years as an aid to new (and incumbent) presidents lists 7,996 positions subject to presidential appointment. While in practice many of will be filled through routine promotions of senior civil servants, in 2008 some 1,141 positions required Senate confirmation. Unless they both want to stay and an incoming president chooses to leave them in place -- as President Obama did in 2009 with Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense -- there is then no one to sign off on regulatory approvals and staff changes and so on until the Senate approves them. Making appointments takes months; confirmation the majority of candidates takes the better part of the year, particularly when the Senate objects to the initial nominee.

An incumbent who is re-elected need not spend time learning the ropes. (Hopefully they will also reflect on successes and failures during their first 4 years!) While many appointees will choose to move on before 2016, a second-term president likewise needs spend little time on personnel issues or other transition tasks.

So unlike 2009, when he faced transition tasks in the midst of a financial crisis, Obama is already on the ground and running. Of course he had the overhead of the election campaign, and so perforce was faced with performing two full-time jobs the past year or so. Crises (and routine tasks) kept intruding. On TV he appears visibly tired, for good reason. Our electoral system imposes a burden on maintaining efficient government operations. We've lessened that burden for the next four years, to our benefit.

...mike smitka...

Who Feeds Leviathan? -- Children!

Mike Smitka

...Leviathan is the creation of 10-year-olds...

What of Leviathan? Let's rely upon data, here the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment Situation Table B-1. [note]

First, where are all those bureaucrats I hear about in the local coffee shop? Their level peaked in 1991, a consequence of the policies of the Reagan era. Yet in the following decade our population, our national income and the complexity of our economy increased. We're trying to provide basic government services on the cheap. Now Social Security checks no longer require an army of paper pushers to get them out each month. But checking for food stamp, tax and medicare fraud -- that requires more, and more skilled workers, not fewer. Don't moan to me about welfare cheats in the same breath you complain about the size of government!

So who created Leviathan? – children did! The only significant source of government employment is education. As our population rose, so did the number of teachers.  Despite continued population, increases, however, their numbers were down by 250,000 going into the summer; given budget pressures, it's anyone's guess how many additional cuts will become visible as school starts. But those I hear railing against Big Government in the local coffee shop are retired or approaching retirement; they have no stake in what happens 10 years from now, when today's kids hit the job market. In contrast, tax cuts are immediate...

Note: BLS data don't include those on active military duty, an artifact of the days when military service was involuntary.