Kansas Crimson

putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop tends to raise eyebrows

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:33 pm putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop tends to raise eyebrows

It's just part of regulatory capture.

And it's inevitable, which is why Big Government and Big Business are two sides of the same coin.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:19 pm

Grandma wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:04 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:06 pm
If Trump wanted these positions filled, they would be filled.

And "only" about not working with Trump is your word added, not one I ever typed.

If Trump wanted them filled people such as you and I would be critical of his appointments no matter who filled the roles. Agree or disagree? I could be 100% wrong but my guess is there aren't a lot of QUALIFIED and EXPERIENCED people chomping on the bit.
Therefore, while I don't feel he's better off not filling them, it seems as if he's damned if he does and he's damned if he doesn't fill them.

Disagree. I had heard of only a small fraction of the people on the lists of people hired and fired for a bunch of roles so clearly them being appointed to those positions isn't resulting in some huge wave of public outrage towards anyone who takes any role in Trump's administration.

My god.

Not everything is about you.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 3:56 pm Another afternoon spent being called a dumbass by PhD and Tdub. This place rocks..

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 2:04 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:53 pm

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 1:49 pm My wife interned for a Senator in college. Thought it was good experience and thought it would look good on her resume. After law school, having that on her resume hurt her because people assumed her political ideals aligned with the senator, when they did not. I guess they did not realize that she wanted to do the internship, would only be able to intern for one of the two senators in her own state, who were both of the same political party.

I can only imagine that that is 100X worse for someone working for Trump. Unless you're planning to retire soon, it's a pretty dumb move to work for the trump administration assuming you ever want another job, because of the assumptions people will make.

Some of you just want to argue with DC for the sake of arguing.

So this was always a hazard of this type of job, just as other jobs have their own hazards that ebb and flow based on who specifically you work for. Got it.

But you don't get it. You just spent two pages arguing that it was only about not wanting to work for Trump.

Because just like DC said, many of these people barely interact with the president, so "working for him" really isn't likely a very strong deterrent for a lot of these positions. What is a deterrent, is the assumption after the fact, that you're a Trump disciple and all that that entails, when in reality you may have just been someone who was qualified for, and wanted that job.

I'm not even arguing that that is the only factor at play here. But it certainly is a big factor, and to argue against it is silly. And to now try to move the goal posts is even worse.

You can call me all sorts of names as those that you do with twocoach, but on this point, you're just wrong. The many positions that I assume we're talking about are all the politically appointed positions within an administration and one doesn't get those without being a heavy duty political operative in a campaign. Sometimes people manage to move down the ranks and stay in government after the administration they came in with is over. I did an internship with a federal agency as part of my graduate degree, where my supervisor was one of those people who'd come in with a previous president.

Those positions are filled by loyalists to a campaign or a president, whether they ever get to meet him at an inaugural party or not. I lived in DC and saw people who were locals, but parts of campaigns go into government. That's a very different person than someone who becomes a Federale because they were part of the various agency internship programs or graduated from GW or American U or Georgetown and knew someone who knew someone who helped them get a place in the civil service, or started at some low level out in the field and then eventually ascended the ranks to position in DC.

There's a vast difference between someone in the regular civil service and the appointive positions--and everyone in Washington knows that. You're also associated with that person or group that you came into an Administration with. The scary part for people with the Trump Administration has to be that Everything Trump Touches Dies--when Trump gets angry with or decides your Big Boss is the latest scapegoat, you're screwed forever, he/she is damaged and you have lost your connections. That also has to be part of a reluctance of decent people to work for this administration.

Lulz

Trump campaign = 80 people

Presidentially appointed federal positions = 4000 jobs

You really think the likes of Ms McEnany, Grisham or Sanders have any skills to hold “employment” outside of Fox, OANN or places like that? I posit that it’s typical for most in the Trump administration, especially one who is going to be hired from now on. Similar situation with people like Dr Jackson. I ask again: would YOU knowingly hire anyone I have named so far?

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:45 pm Lulz

Trump campaign = 80 people

Presidentially appointed federal positions = 4000 jobs

Correct. It's why I specifically pointed out that the Brookings study I linked focused on the administrative positions closest to the admimistration, not the giant pile of 4,000+ federally appointed positions:

"Fortunately, from 1981 to 2009, the National Journal published, during each president’s first year, a list of those whom it called “Decision Makers” (what I call here the “A” Team). Its five lists included, on average, 60 staff members from the White House staff and the Executive Office of the President (e.g., Office of Management and Budget, National Security Council, Council on Environmental Quality, National Economic Council, and members of the vice president’s staff). "

Yes, I do feel that the general hostile atmosphere towards the terrible hiring record of this administration could and has made some good, qualified people not consider pursuing these positions. But no, I do not feel that a list of those who chose not to for that reason would be nearly as long as a list of those who failed to pursue positions that they were interested in due to the volatile nature of Trump, his treatment of those who don't kiss his ass or who actually stand up to him and disagree with his ignorance.

Further, there appear to some key positions in his "A-Team" staff that he appears to simply be making no effort to refill. Why? I have my opinions but who knows.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 8:19 pm

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:33 pm putting the fox in charge of the chicken coop tends to raise eyebrows

It's just part of regulatory capture.

And it's inevitable, which is why Big Government and Big Business are two sides of the same coin.

putting a former lobbyist for big coal in charge of the EPA is/was inevitable?

maybe only when we’ve got an administration as clueless as the current one

Wheeler has an MBA...zero science background, is a climate change denier, is against limiting greenhouse gas emissions and is a critic of the IPCC. and he got his start with mr. snowball, jim inhofe. he actively lobbied against regulations for power plants, sought subsidies for big coal, and advocated the roll-back of coal regulations

his appointment was inevitable? seriously?

former heads of the EPA

Pruitt (trump) self-described as the leading advocate against the EPA’s so-called activist agendas

McCabe (trump) an actual environmental lawyer that lasted a total of one month in the administration

McCarthy (Obama) environmental health and air quality expert

Perciasepe (Obama) former chief officer for National Audubon Society, integral member of the EPA during the Clinton Admin. for establishing Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act

Jackson (Obama) chemical engineer who worked her way to the top of the EPA through 16 years of service, and oversaw the implementation of stricter fuel efficiency standards, set stricter smog pollution standards, and oversaw the EPA’s response to the Deepwater Horizon disaster

Johnson (Bush 2) B.A. in Biology and Masters in Pathology, worked for EPA since 1979 and became acting director in 2003. was assistant administrator for the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. first career employee nominated to head the EPA, and apparently the first “scientist”

Leavitt (Bush 2) former governor of Utah, administrator for EPA, and former Secretary of Health and Human Services. whole head of EPA, implemented higher ozone and diesel fuel standards, and organized federal collaboration to clean the Great Lakes

Horinko (Bush 2) B.S. in Analytical Chemistry. formerly an attorney involved in Clean Water Act, pesticide, and Superfund litigation. was responsible for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act regulatory issues

Whitman (Bush 2) former governor of New Jersey, in which she led the effort to reduce New Jersey’s ground level ozone level from 45 to 4, and was recognized by the Natural Resources Defense Council for their beach monitoring. she also implemented a watershed management program for the state

Browner (Clinton) former director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. still the longest-serving administrator in the history of the EPA. implemented and oversaw reorganization and streamlining of the EPA, successfully fought republican efforts to gut the Clean Water Act and roll back other environmental regulations. worked with republicans to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act and pass the Food Quality Protection Act. also implemented and oversaw the Brownfields Program to facilitate the cleanup of contaminated industrial and commercial lands, and most notably lead the effort to tighten the Clean Air Act and National Ambient Air Quality Standards

i could go on and on, but the point is that this administration is breaking with norms of part administrations, on both sides of the isle, to the detriment of the country and future generations

You should read more.

lulz

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:45 pm Lulz

Trump campaign = 80 people

Presidentially appointed federal positions = 4000 jobs

Well, DC, perhaps you're more knowledgeable about campaigning than my husband, who only ran for various offices about 5 times, who won twice and served 28 years in public office and said during the 2016 campaign that some very sophisticated campaign work was being done by the Trump Campaign that media wasn't seeing and wasn't covering. And you're telling me (who lived and worked in the DC area) that all the bullshit lobbyist shops around Lafayette Square, like the one you worked for, or the gazillion other lobbyist outfits in DC, Bethesda and Arlington weren't working for the Trump Campaign and didn't have staffers with access to federal positions in the Trump administration?

Please. When I lived in DC, I was offered a job with another consulting firm than the one I worked for and interviewed for a job at PBS that I could have taken, but chose in both cases to stay with the more secure position on a contract with my Fortune 30 company. I imagine that many who were employed with some group that had done work on the Trump Campaign and could have gone into one of those many appointive positions thought twice about doing so, just as I did.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:03 am You should read more.

Feel free to provide us a link to what we should read that will make Trump appointing those clowns to head the EPA seem like a perfectly normal action and good moves to protect the environment. I'd be happy to read it.

DC loves to talk about the evils of big government and defends Trump at every moment, who seems comfortable that his and DC's rural red states haven't seen that many COVID-19 cases yet, so all is okay, It's just a disease that affects them coastal elites and blue urban places.

It will be interesting to see the effect that rampant COVID-19 has in those rural communities where DC's Big Government Republicans built prisons like crazy and gave jobs to the Bubbas who were too stupid, ill-educated, or unwilling to move to get other jobs. The kind of communities where the rural hospital is already failing and has at most one ICU bed.

And where they listen to Hannity and the others telling them it's all a hoax, don't worry their heads about social distancing.

Yay, Big Government Republicans, could be interesting.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ers-island

My god. Talk about elitist bullshit.

seahawk wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 12:36 pm DC loves to talk about the evils of big government and defends Trump at every moment, who seems comfortable that his and DC's rural red states haven't seen that many COVID-19 cases yet, so all is okay, It's just a disease that affects them coastal elites and blue urban places.

It will be interesting to see the effect that rampant COVID-19 has in those rural communities where DC's Big Government Republicans built prisons like crazy and gave jobs to the Bubbas who were too stupid, ill-educated, or unwilling to move to get other jobs. The kind of communities where the rural hospital is already failing and has at most one ICU bed.

And where they listen to Hannity and the others telling them it's all a hoax, don't worry their heads about social distancing.

Yay, Big Government Republicans, could be interesting.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... ers-island

Yikes.

seahawk wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:40 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 08, 2020 11:45 pm Lulz

Trump campaign = 80 people

Presidentially appointed federal positions = 4000 jobs

Well, DC, perhaps you're more knowledgeable about campaigning than my husband, who only ran for various offices about 5 times, who won twice and served 28 years in public office and said during the 2016 campaign that some very sophisticated campaign work was being done by the Trump Campaign that media wasn't seeing and wasn't covering. And you're telling me (who lived and worked in the DC area) that all the bullshit lobbyist shops around Lafayette Square, like the one you worked for, or the gazillion other lobbyist outfits in DC, Bethesda and Arlington weren't working for the Trump Campaign and didn't have staffers with access to federal positions in the Trump administration?

Please. When I lived in DC, I was offered a job with another consulting firm than the one I worked for and interviewed for a job at PBS that I could have taken, but chose in both cases to stay with the more secure position on a contract with my Fortune 30 company. I imagine that many who were employed with some group that had done work on the Trump Campaign and could have gone into one of those many appointive positions thought twice about doing so, just as I did.

I've never worked for a lobbyist or a lobbying shop.

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:40 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:03 am You should read more.

Feel free to provide us a link to what we should read that will make Trump appointing those clowns to head the EPA seem like a perfectly normal action and good moves to protect the environment. I'd be happy to read it.

OK.

Theodore J. Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States

Alfred Kahn, The Economics of Regulation: Principles and Institutions

And especially:

James Q. Wilson, Bureaucracy

It's all pretty standard bureaucratic theory: Technology makes the world complicated. Regulating a complicated world requires specialized knowledge. Specialized knowledge is almost exclusively held by industry practitioners. Therefore, if government wants to regulate, it has to choose primarily from industry practitioners -- most of whom then go back to industry but are even better at their previous jobs because they now have regulatory experience AND contacts.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 3:05 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:40 am

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 09, 2020 11:03 am You should read more.

Feel free to provide us a link to what we should read that will make Trump appointing those clowns to head the EPA seem like a perfectly normal action and good moves to protect the environment. I'd be happy to read it.

OK.

Theodore J. Lowi, The End of Liberalism: The Second Republic of the United States

Alfred Kahn, The Economics of Regulation: Principles and Institutions

And especially:

James Q. Wilson, Bureaucracy

It's all pretty standard bureaucratic theory: Technology makes the world complicated. Regulating a complicated world requires specialized knowledge. Specialized knowledge is almost exclusively held by industry practitioners. Therefore, if government wants to regulate, it has to choose primarily from industry practitioners -- most of whom then go back to industry but are even better at their previous jobs because they now have regulatory experience AND contacts.

So to best regulate the environment, it is best to hire from the companies who actively want to destroy the environment because protecting it takes profits out of their pockets. Makes sense...

You're an idiot.