Executive order removes protections from career bureaucrats

[wtburnette]

Ronald Sanders resigns his position in protest to this move which would not have ever crossed Trump's mind had these people been the apolitical servants and guardians of the republic Sanders paints them to be.

https://www-washingtonpost-com.cdn....d05a22-17a4-11eb-82db-60b15c874105_story.html

 

[Keith_Indy]

Gotta snake the drain clear before you can drain the swamp...

 

[Kutnupe14]

So for those folks complaining about the "brace ban" being Trump's fault, now you're seeing him implement changes that will directly impact such actions.

So when is he going to fix it then? Because he can fix it now right?

 

[Keith_Indy]

To require the political loyalty ?
Heh, get ready for a purging of compromised personnel.

I don't care about political loyalty.

I do care about outright hostility against the President and actively working against the President.

 

[Ingomike]

So when is he going to fix it then? Because he can fix it now right?

Really? He is going to Fire the ATF in the final two weeks of an election?

 

[OakRiver]

By increasing the accountability of career bureaucrats, and imposing term limits, I think that we could see significant improvements in the respect for our liberties. Having unelected bureaucrats unilaterally decide to reinterpret laws that affect millions of Americans, and having the judicial branch give deference to these bureaucrats, is the antithesis of an open and fair society.

 

[Ingomike]

By increasing the accountability of career bureaucrats, and imposing term limits, I think that we could see significant improvements in the respect for our liberties. Having unelected bureaucrats unilaterally decide to reinterpret laws that affect millions of Americans, and having the judicial branch give deference to these bureaucrats, is the antithesis of an open and fair society.

I used to be a term limits guy, but no more. There are much bigger issues to deal with. If you can look at this from a different direction, with me, and think abut the ramifications.

I see several potential negative outcomes from term limits.

The biggest is if we term limit the representatives then only the bureaucrats and lobbyists will have significant tenure and experience. Our representatives would always be the least battle prepped to fight in the swamp.

If every election cycle a third or half the house was term limited the likelihood of bad legislation increases due to all the lame ducks that have no reason to worry about constituents at home.

The typical congressperson is reelected with 55% of the vote, a 55% approval, and many do better than that. However studies show that congress itself has a 6% approval, meaning that almost everyone hates everyone else's congressperson...

 

[Kutnupe14]

By increasing the accountability of career bureaucrats, and imposing term limits, I think that we could see significant improvements in the respect for our liberties. Having unelected bureaucrats unilaterally decide to reinterpret laws that affect millions of Americans, and having the judicial branch give deference to these bureaucrats, is the antithesis of an open and fair society.

Term limits? For career officials? What exactly is that?

 

[OakRiver]

I used to be a term limits guy, but no more. There are much bigger issues to deal with. If you can look at this from a different direction, with me, and think abut the ramifications.

I see several potential negative outcomes from term limits.

The biggest is if we term limit the representatives then only the bureaucrats and lobbyists will have significant tenure and experience. Our representatives would always be the least battle prepped to fight in the swamp.

If every election cycle a third or half the house was term limited the likelihood of bad legislation increases due to all the lame ducks that have no reason to worry about constituents at home.

The typical congressperson is reelected with 55% of the vote, a 55% approval, and many do better than that. However studies show that congress itself has a 6% approval, meaning that almost everyone hates everyone else's congressperson...

If we implement a system where bureaucrats turn over more often that reduces the impact that they have on our political lobby. In terms of the lobbyists, having turn limits would reduce the ability for them to develop these long lasting relationships that they have with long serving politicians. Having a hard reset every X years would at least reduce their influence as they have to rebuild their relationships more often.

 

[Keith_Indy]

Only way to reduce the power of lobbyists is to reduce the power of the Federal government...

No play for the pay will get a lot of people uninterested in lobbying the Federal government.

 

[Ingomike]

Only way to reduce the power of lobbyists is to reduce the power of the Federal government...

No play for the pay will get a lot of people uninterested in lobbying the Federal government.

Winner!

 

[Kutnupe14]

Only way to reduce the power of lobbyists is to reduce the power of the Federal government...

No play for the pay will get a lot of people uninterested in lobbying the Federal government.

I know the notion you're trying to convey, but the notion is false. Lobbyists aren't going anywhere, and the less power the federal govt has, the STRONGER they will become .

 

[spencer rifle]

I know the notion you're trying to convey, but the notion is false. Lobbyists aren't going anywhere, and the less power the federal govt has, the STRONGER they will become .

And how will that work? If fedgov has less power to pick winners and losers, and less power to put up regulational roadblocks to competition, what will the lobbyists money buy them?
More power to the states will require the lobbyists to bring their corruption closer to home and voter accountability.

 

[Ingomike]

Only way to reduce the power of lobbyists is to reduce the power of the Federal government...

No play for the pay will get a lot of people uninterested in lobbying the Federal government.

I know the notion you're trying to convey, but the notion is false. Lobbyists aren't going anywhere, and the less power the federal govt has, the STRONGER they will become .

The word power has different meanings in the sentence locations. The power of lobbyists is the power of persuasion and blackmail. The power of the government is vague overreaching laws. The power of persuasion and blackmail will not increase with fewer overreaching laws. In fact if there are fewer overreaching laws there would be less need for lobbying...

 

[jamil]

I know the notion you're trying to convey, but the notion is false. Lobbyists aren't going anywhere, and the less power the federal govt has, the STRONGER they will become .

Lobbyists work on three fronts on behalf of interested parties, and they are the three main branches of government. They lobby executive politicians & bureaucrats, and they lobby legislators, and they lobby judiciary in more subtle ways. If the executive branch had less power to provide a payoff, that would decrease lobbying in the executive branch. That doesn’t imply that there is more room in the other two branches.

But as it pertains to this EO, it doesn’t really reduce lobbying in the executive branch at all. Even if agency upper management turns over with every president, they still have the legislatively granted role of policymaking. They still have power. It’s just that the power is more controlled by the chief executive.