AS WAS PREDICTED in this space on Election Day, some Bush political appointees are scrambling to hold onto their jobs now that the president who appointed them is leaving office and their political party is in temporary eclipse.
The Washington Post reported this week that between March 1 and Nov. 3, the administration allowed 20 political appointees to transfer into career Civil Service jobs.
Known as “burrowing,” the practice of moving political loyalists into Civil Service jobs is not new. At the end of any administration, there are always some appointees who would rather stay in jobs they like than revise their resumes and look for new jobs.
But the current administration has been known for putting political loyalty far ahead of competence in its appointments. The nation will long remember the “heckuva” job Michael Brown did with the Federal Emergency Management Agency after Hurricane Katrina. Other appointees imposed political litmus tests on scientific and other data produced by their departments.
That raises the question of whether these new civil servants should be considered dedicated government employees or political moles planted in the power structure of the executive branch to influence — and perhaps even sabotage — future administrations.
As the new administration settles its own political appointees into place, it will soon become apparent which of the old hands are there to help and which to hinder. If they are there to help, fine. If not, they will have to go.
Firing a civil servant is not easy, but an administrator of any experience knows how to move a hostile employee out of the loop.
But providing make-work jobs for political hacks can get expensive, and that money must come from the taxpayers.
It would be better if, down the road, rules were changed to require political appointees who wanted to switch to Civil Service to compete on a level playing field with any other applicants for the jobs.
Patrick S. Kelley
Editorial Page Editor