A MODEST PROPOSAL

The media has been full of articles about the difficulty the Obama administration has had filling jobs at the cabinet and sub-cabinet level. The Treasury has been the object of greatest concern because it is obviously on the front line of the new administration's frantic effort to deal with the gathering deep recession.

This problem for incoming American administrations is not new. It usually takes more than a year to fill all of the political appointments in a new administration. We just don't usually notice or read many articles about the trouble filling jobs. This time the spotlight on this problem is so much greater.

Comparing the British system, as always, is interesting and in this case perhaps provides a good contrast which American political leaders might consider when taking up promised reforms over the next few years.

To start with, the British don't experience months of sometimes paralyzing "lame duck" government between the "long goodbye" of the outgoing administration and the arrival in office of the new. The new British Prime Ministers takes office within hours, yes hours, of his parties' victory in the election. Moving trucks taking the outgoing Prime Minister's household possessions literally leave the Prime Minister's residence and office, Number Ten Downing Street within hours. The new Prime Minister's moving truck has unloaded by the following morning.

How can this be possible? First of all, Prime Ministers are much more experienced than new American presidents in the duties of government when they take office. On average, British Prime Ministers arrive at Number Ten with more than a dozen years and sometimes much more in the House of Commons. Further, most of them have been Cabinet ministers in major departments in earlier governments. Also, Prime Ministers almost always name as Cabinet colleagues and sub Cabinet colleagues individuals who also have had many years of experience in the House of Commons and as ministers at some level.

The second reason is that the British system builds in a high level of continuity by tasking its highly trained civil service with high level policy jobs. In fact, a new Prime Minister names only about 150 or so political party colleagues to the total of all ministerial jobs in the numerous departments of governments. This compares to about 10,000 political appointments in the Washington governmental structure.

While a new President enters a nearly empty White House, a new British Prime Minister by contrast is greeted by a very large staff of civil servants when he or she enters Number Ten. Yes, a Prime Minister does bring along several dozen political advisers, but the group of civil servants is much larger: ready and willing to work diligently as is their tradition, for the new Prime Ministers as they worked only hours before for the outgoing administration on the business of governing.

The point about all this is to wonder and perhaps consider whether the American system is less effective than it might be if we had a British style continuity featuring a highly trained civil service and a smaller cadre of politial appointees? It is no advantage, especially in challenging times as now, for a new administration to arrive to nearly bare walls and no staff in the White House. Obviously new administrations want to enjoy great latitude and leverage in crafting their own policies, but that does not need to be at the expense of greater continuity, expertise and institutional memory.