Trump hires at only half the pace of previous presidents

Washington Examiner ^ | Apr 14, 2017, 10:01 PM | Todd Shepherd

[9YearLurker]

If they aren’t Trump hires at the top of department or agency, he won’t get his directives loyally executed.

This is actually a big problem for Trump at this point. He should have all available political hires in the pipeline at this point. Instead he has just a small fraction of them submitted for approval in the Senate.

[9YearLurker]

That is increasingly due to his not having got his own appointees proposed, let alone put in place.

A major problem that he dismissed as not even needing to address early on.

[9YearLurker]

Hardly anyone submitted hasn’t yet been approved. The problem is that Trump hasn’t submitted nominees for the vast, vast majority of positions.

[Sooth2222]

He's probably unaware of any successful business in any capitalist country that has 15 GS levels plus 5 levels of political appointees managing them.

Getting rid of half of most government agencies would be "a nice start".

[sphinx]

On the same subject, somebody needs to clue in the Trump White House that the clock is ticking. The headlines will be dominated by whatever the press wants to sensationalize today, but Congress is gearing up to consider what will be the first “Trump budget.” As things stand now, the congressional subcommittees will call all the shots. Trump doesn’t have a team in place, either in the agencies or in OMB, that can even begin to carry his side of the discussion. A cabinet secretary can’t begin to noodle down to the level of detail needed. By this fall, the first budget will be nearing completion and the Congress will be in campaign mode for the 2018 elections. Real reform will get exponentially harder after that. The window is going to close in another six months, and at the current rate, Trump still won’t have his team in place.

[Big Red Badger]

A Good Team is a group of like minded
And motivated individuals,
Not self indulgent seat warmers.

[sphinx]

I agree. But either way, Trump needs to fill the seats. 90 percent of the government (measured by programs and personnel, not dollars) is not controversial. A lot of government could indeed be reorganized and downsized; there are far too many overlapping and redundant programs that limp along, underfunded, because they are the gleam in some subcommittee chairman's eye. This is not the fault of the agencies; it's the fault of Congress, and of deals struck over many years in a political culture that makes it much easier to create a new program than to end an old one. Just about every administration would prefer larger, streamlined programs with much greater administrative flexibility. It's Congress that doesn't trust the executive with such power and that tends to prefer micro-targeted programs. But however you want to slice and dice that situation, Trump can't manage the agencies until he gets his own managers in place. He is way behind the curve.

The comments above pertain mostly to the non-controversial machinery of government that we tend to take for granted. It's mostly non-controversial. The big dollars, of course, are in entitlements, defense, and debt service. Trump flamed out on his first attempt at repealing Obamacare, he wants to increase defense spending, and he doesn't want to reform Social Security. He's spinning his wheels.

The Democrats clearly think they can run out the clock. They will simply slow-walk everything they can't filibuster. Trump is making it easy for them. And if the dems can regain either the House or the Senate next year, Trump will be done before he gets started.

[Vince Ferrer]

He needs to hire auditors and accountants for each agency with the sole assignment of rooting out fraud and waste.

[Albion Wilde]

Percentage of what? Doesn’t tell the whole story. If previous presidents just let everyone from the Uniparty stay on, there were a lot fewer slots to fill. And they demonstrably didn’t weed out leftists. Plus, Obama had “binders full” of left wingers and political favorites he was eager to insert, regardless of qualifications, or lack thereof.

Trump is actually trying to hire good, loyal people.

[Albion Wilde]

[Albion Wilde]

Oops! I posted that cartoon to the wrong thread! It’s still funny, tho.

[monkeybrau]

Previous administrations had long lists of people “owed” positions. Lots of people who had been promised in advance, regardless of ability or suitability, a job. The difference this time is thoughtful vetting and accountability, hiring the best people as perceived by the administration. They won’t always get it right, but they will at least take the time to try.