November 17, 2008
We get "scaled back" because we are stupid...
This piece about Obama writing to federal employees before the election is a subject where I could criticize the Dems harshly for a variety of conservative reasons. But others will do that job, no doubt. I'm in a mood to criticize... Republicans....
In wooing federal employee votes on the eve of the election, Barack Obama wrote a series of letters to workers that offer detailed descriptions of how he intends to add muscle to specific government programs, give new power to bureaucrats and roll back some Bush administration policies.
The letters, sent to employees at seven agencies, describe Obama's intention to scale back on contracts to private firms doing government work, to remove censorship from scientific research, and to champion tougher industry regulation to protect workers and the environment...
Notice the bold type above. You read in Random Jottings way back in 2002 about what Bush was doing to open federal jobs to private bidders. Link [I've been giving you the straight dope since November-2001! Has it earned me fame and fortune? Nah.]
SO, how much have you heard about this since? In particular, how much support and praise did President Bush get from Republicans? From conservatives? From the "oh-so-wise" at National Review? None, as far as I've noticed. Bush was out in front doing things conservatives should be lauding, encouraging, publicizing.
I'm sure this would have been popular with voters, if it had been publicized. It's not like ordinary Americans are fond of Federal bureaucrats. So why hasn't the party been running on things like this? Bragging about it? And conservatives, libertarians, wake up: this is the closest you are ever going to get to cutting back the Federal monster. Shrinking big government isn't going to happen--but there are a lot of things we can to to mitigate the problem. You had a chance to, and it looks like you blew it...
PS: If you think I'm surprised by anything Obama's doing, well, I notice that I was also writing in 2002 about the fact then emerging that President Carter asked the SOVIETS to help him defeat Reagan! If I write that "Democrats" are evil slime animals, it is not because I'm intemperate and uncharitable, it's because they are, obviously, evil slime animals...
Posted by John Weidner at November 17, 2008 09:23 AMYou were right as always; do these folk know where you live in San Francisco?
Posted by: narciso at November 17, 2008 12:02 PMWhat sort of help did Carter ask of the russians and who was it on their side he talked to? Do you have transcripts of the communications.When did this happen,around 1979? I honestly have never seen one word on this.
Posted by: petepenguin at November 17, 2008 01:10 PMHere's my link, and the NewsMax link, which has changed...
The book is Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty-Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism
Posted by: John Weidner at November 17, 2008 02:20 PMAnd you haven't heard about it because people like me express our outrage, and then sigh, and realize that nobody cares, and nothing's going to happen.
This was treason during a war---admittedly a "cold war," but still... Carter should have gone to prison at the least, and the Democrats should have lost the next 6 or 8 elections because of this.
Jay Nordlinger had it exactly right when he said that Carter was the first anti-American president. Now we got another one...
Posted by: John Weidner at November 17, 2008 02:26 PMIn my country, this concept of private companies running govt work (aka public-private partnership)
exists solely so that connected politicians and bureaucrats ahdn their friends/families could get their hand upon even more public monies.
The point should have been to reduce govt work and the retiring President totally failed there.
Posted by: Bisaal at November 17, 2008 08:42 PMWell, we're not in your country, Bisaal. In this country we promote private industry because it is good. We would prefer that private companies do work instead of government-ruled entities wherever possible, because it is the government contracted firms that tend to slide into corruption such as you have described.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at November 18, 2008 12:14 PMBut what kind of work?. What is the gain if govt outsources make-work to private sector and pays private sector for that?.
Posted by: Bisaal at November 18, 2008 11:08 PMHere's the punchline, Kennedy's chief aide who handled the negotiations with the Kremlin; is now the White House counsel.
Posted by: narciso at November 19, 2008 06:15 AMBisaal,
Government agencies have no incentive to work efficiently. In fact they usually pay the bosses according to how big their departments are, so they have an incentive to do just the opposite.
If private firms can bid to do some of their work, then it tends to be done more cheaply by whoever ends up with the job, public or private.
What kinds of work? I don't actually know. Here's an article that describes some of this. It says that the program has not managed to save much money or change much...
