Understanding the Revolving Door
My hat's off to Eric Lipton and The New York Times for the revolving door series, started yesterday. Amongst other regrets and missed opportunities in writing this blog over the past year, I regret not writing more about this subject.
The sad truth though is that there seems little appetite, in Washington in particular, for the subject.
And I have been uncomfortable with the dominant models for reporting the story: a straight government ethics and kickbacks/influence peddling theme, which offers no broader lessons; a following one individual or set of individuals -- homeland security officials in the Times series, as an example -- eminently worthwhile but an endless Niagara; or with an assumption that this is uniquely a Republican or Bush phenomenon theme, which is dead wrong, and offers the wrong lesson.
I do think to understand the Washington revolving door story, one has to follow the money. It is the lure of a big payday that even the most ethical public servant can't resist.
The New York Times couldn't say it directly, but "government service," even after 9/11, even in homeland security -- THE MOST IMPORTANT JOB IN THE WORLD to its occupants -- has turned into a ticket.
The New York Times reported yesterday in the first part of a series on the revolving door -- note to editors: where's The Washington Post on this story? -- describing the fate of dozens of national security officials who toiled after 9/11 and who are "now collecting bigger paychecks in different roles: working on behalf of companies that sell domestic security products, many directly to the federal agencies the officials once helped run."
From its first paragraph then, The Times theme is ethics. The series focuses on the move of officials from government to the domestic security business, with an ominous connotation of influence peddling, with the suggestion of tightened rules and more "oversight."
For reasons that are still up for grabs and seem outside of the purview and focus of writers of history and practitioners of anthropology, sociology, and political sciences, the much bigger story to me is how this phenomenon, repeated throughout the national security community and extending into all other areas of government has also had the impact of fundamentally changing Washington as a city and as a culture since, say, the 1970's.
First, no one just goes home anymore. Former government officials, voted out Congressmembers, retired generals and colonels, they stay. It isn't because Washington is such a beautiful place to live, and it isn't merely because their kids go to school, nor because the spouse also has a job. It is a little of all of those things (though Americans move all the time), but it is also that there are "jobs" in Washington, inscrutable jobs and lucrative jobs.
Inscrutable jobs because the national security world has fundamentally changed. We are no longer talking about a military-industrial complex of weapons makers and metal benders. Even in support of the military and intelligence community, the vast majority of what the U.S. national security industry produces today is information technology, the software and hardware not just of communications and networking, but also the embedded elements of every weapon, every airplane, and every ship. PowerPoint is the new throw-weight; the cogs of the policy process are more important than the cogs of machines.
Process is the key word here: contracts, studies, boards, commissions, retreats, seminars, conferences, lunches.
As the Washington payday has ballooned, is it just my imagination, or hasn't Washington also fundamentally changed. The business of national security dominated by PowerPoint and a never-ending and impossible to quantify creation of ideas and policy ensures that no decision is ever really made, no words uttered, no stance taken -- inside or outside government -- without considering how it's going to affect a future consulting job, lobbying perch, board invitation, television appearance, speaking gig, conference in paradise, or step up the ladder.
Government work is back-breaking. High-level White House and Departmental work in particular, is family and personal life destroying, and sending one's kids to private school and living in an increasingly expensive urban area requires more than just a government salary provides. There is a natural burn-out period even for the most dedicated individual.
But the money, and the vague nature of the ideas industry, is just too attractive. The product is too ephemeral to measure, which also means that the stature of the product creator and the measurer has more to do with the pay than with the effect.
Fabulous money and an inscrutable industry produce "national security." The world of consulting businesses and Beltway bandits and corporate "Washington offices" and think tanks and special interest groups needs a fresh look. That look needs to stretch beyond the ethics paradigm, and it needs to go outside the partisan world. This is a Democrat as much as a Republican problem.
If there is an ethical crisis in Washingotn and government today, it is that much of government values and produces a product that seems to have no relationship to delivering services to the citizens. The profits involved in producing that product ensures that government today -- at least for those who see $$$ in their future -- is no longer public service; it is resume padding.
By William M. Arkin |
June 19, 2006; 8:31 AM ET
Revolving Door
Previous: Baghdad Acts Like a Real Government |
Next: North Korea's Non-Threat
Posted by: Acid Queen of Progressive | June 22, 2006 9:52 AM
WANTED:
REAL REPORTERS
FOR REAL NEWS
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml
Prof. Steven Jones, who conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility, has analyzed materials from WTC and has detected the existence of thermate, used for "cutting" the steel support columns, as evident in the photo below.
Dr. Jones is a co-founder of Scholars for 911 Truth.
Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. But only recently was physical material analysed in the lab and the presense of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses.
Both BYU and Prof. Jones have been offered additional grants if he would "change the direction" of his research. In addition, there have been threats made by an individual who "is taking action" to stop Steven Jones' research, specifically his experiment with thermites (aluminothermics), on the grounds his work may be helpful to "terrorists". Jones notes that much more detailed information on both thermite and thermate is readily available on the internet.
Love,
God
P.S.
DATELINE: 9/11
THE ANGLE: THE U.S. GOVT "NEW YORK" STORY
THEIR ANGLE: 1+1=3
Q: HOW DID THEY DO IT?
A: "SEE ABOVE"
Posted by: God | June 20, 2006 1:29 AM
Interesting comments, so far, concerning Mr. Arkins "Revolving Door" article. The one that really scares me though is the posting from SP4 MP Army Veteran...Do we have another Timothy McVea in the making, and if so...how many more have we spawned with our mis-adventures in Iraq? MP is the acronym for Military Police (Law Enforcement)...Not a good sign! Are we really getting an accurate read from our politicians and press, concerning the true feelings of our Armed Forces? If SP4 MP Army Veteran is any indication...I Don't think so!
To Mr. Magnuson...Your solution to set off a Neutron Bomb in D.C. is a bit of a stretch (Hopefully in Jest)...However, Your comments about Peoria are right on the mark! Peoria represents Middle-America and Middle-of-the-Road solutions. We used to poll Peoria often for thoughts and opinions...In all seriousness, we need to start that again! It has been obvious for some time that nobody in Washington thinks objectively or demonstrates any common sense!
Posted by: M. Stewart | June 19, 2006 4:56 PM
True as it appears.....
However, what you fail to mention is that because the bloated government demigods that are supposed to be busy watching the store are actually selling it to the highest bisser.
Take the issue of exporting American jobs, the 'elected' officials responsible for managing our economic policies (which is in-fact the most important to national security) have allowed other countries such as India, China, Malaysia, etc to take away jobs by offering tax incentives (http://people.cornellcollege.edu/B-Joniec/outsourcing.PDF ).
All you have to do is look at the 'actual' economic numbers to see what is really going on ( ttp://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=402 .....
Fr any hypocrite that calls themselves American, then shuns their sworn duty because they are blinded by their own greed or claims ignorance, I say hang-em on Pennsylvania Ave.
Put down the propaganda...... or get off the line.....
Posted by: Mike T. | June 19, 2006 3:22 PM
Interesting subject.
Americans would do well to compare their political/bureaucratic system with the British Parliamentary system and customs. This is not to say one is better or worse, each have their deficiencies, one looking at how others do things differently helps to shed light on why we end up with what we have.
Consider: a civil service leadership which is thoroughly partisan and short-term, one-administration, in outlook. How can it possibly be professionally competent and have any pretense to be bound to the public interest. For such people, public service is not a career but an opportunity to set themselves up for a job in academia or the private sector. Enough said on revolving doors.
Consider: a President and a Cabinet which are not accountable on a daily basis to the people's representatives. Where executive privilege trumps parliamentary accountability.
Consider: a system where you have no leader of the opposition able to provide an identity and focus to the party out of power, and able to demand answers from the President.
Your system is inherently dysfunctional. It is designed not to work. The irony is that it was intended to break up power so that nothing could get done: the outcome is that power has become concentrated in the hands of a President who does not want to do anything that might threaten the power, wealth and privileges of the affluent class.
Posted by: Eric Yendall | June 19, 2006 2:35 PM
Most of these people are like the Pointy Haired boss in the Dilbert cartoon and totally useless.
While I am not a fan of John Foster Dullas, he was an international lawyer, and had been in and out of the State Department since the Wilson Administration. When he came aboard as secretary of State during Eisenhower's Administration, he had experience. All he had to do was to hang up his hat, and he was good to go.
The current Bush Administration drags in these idiots from private enterprise whose management skills are limited to "Productivity" and "competitiveness" in driving down wages. Their ability to read does not extend beyond the balance sheet. I wish them luck in private enterprise, because they are useless in government.
Posted by: P. J. Casey | June 19, 2006 2:18 PM
It is not a "revoling door".
It is political buricratic BS being used as an excuse to raise our taxes and bolster Bthe Nazi Bush as a alledged War Time President so he can try to claim a third as God of the World.
Bush has clearly stated on the news "you want a dictator. Here I am."
Sp4MP Army Veteran
Jackson, Michigan
Posted by: Sp4MP | June 19, 2006 1:26 PM
When Mr. Smith goes to Washington:
In the past, when I spent a lot of time, going back and forth to Washington DC, I was shocked, given the sense of cynicism and sarcasm that seemed to be so pervasive in our nation's Capitol.
I was speaking on Capitol Hill on one occasion, when one of our former U.S. Representatives took me aside to say, Reverend, let me tell you how Washington D.C. really operates (my naivete was apparently aglow). And did he tell me how in particular how our Congress really worked! I went back to my hotel and showered afterward!
Some time later, someone informed me that the Congress itself, exempts itself from most of the legislation that it imposes on other Americans and American organizations. How can that be, I thought?
Well, I thought about what that gentlemen told me just a week ago, given the F.B.I. raid of Representative Jefferson's office, and the furor that resulted in Congress.
I thought to myself, he must have been correct, for The Honorable Mr. Hatchert and others certainly felt that the actions of the FBI were a breach of justice.
In my opinion, cynicism and sarcasm will either lead to mistrust, or they both are the result of mistrust.
I also experienced the extant air of corruption and nihilism, whenever I spoke with and met with other officials in the District, as well as with the citizens, themselves in the District of Columbia. There is a political cut-throat, take-no-hostages mentality operating in our nation's Capitol.
It would seem to me that the transitory nature of our Federal Government has turned out to be a negative instead of a positive, at times.
There are too many little separate and distinct island-fiefdoms operating in Washington, populated with people who are coming and going, and with the aim of simply getting what their interest(s) requires. For afterward, they are ready to move up, mover over or to move on.
What happened to the true Statesperson? Too idyllic?
Perhaps we should remember the words of the late President John F. Kennedy, when he repeated those words, "ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country".
For it seems to me that when Mr. Smith goes to Washington today, he is not going there to give anything, he goes to Washington to pursue his own interests!
And in the 21st century, too many times, Monsieur or Senor Smith is not even an AMERICAN citizen. Washington DC has simply become a place to go and get what you want!
TRFKA
Posted by: The Reverend Formerly Known As | June 19, 2006 1:14 PM
Hmm, bemoaning the lack of an ideal are we? Yes, the ambitious members of our government, politically affiliated or not, do indeed use their positions as resume padding so that they may get paid more in the private sector. The question that never seems to get asked is why do they feel the need to do this? Perhaps we should be paying our senior government officials and their deputies the pay they deserve for helping to run the most powerful government in human history. Then they might not feel the need to cynically pad their resumes with high level positions and can devote their considerable talents to making government more efficient. Perhaps we should be devoting more tax revenue to these people's salaries than to giveaways and welfare-state programs which do not bring near as much benefit to our society as an efficient and dedicated civil service corps most certainly would. Oh well, so much for ideals.
Trust always in Reason
Archimedes
Posted by: Archimedes | June 19, 2006 12:22 PM
Years ago when I read a lot of Ayn Rand, I found I could not really accept a lot of her philosophy-it seemed too Eden like. However, in "Atlas Shrugged", one of the main themes she used in describing the total corruption in Washington was the "politics of pull." That clearly is where we are today. Virtually nothing is decided on merit, it's totally about "pull." While, I'm not naive enough toour government has ever been immune from the politics of pull, it just seems like now, from my common citizen point of view, that Eisenhower was so correct, and that corruption, of both the overt and "costumed" variety appears to be completely out of control. I suspect that it will take a revolution of some sort to fix if. Sometime I'm sorry we didn't fully develop the neutron bomb. Drop one on DC (the people "vanish", the monuments remain to visit) and rebuild the whole thing in Peoria. Diogenes would search in vain in Washington if his search were limited to the halls of power and those who frequent them in search og "pull"
Posted by: Magnuson | June 19, 2006 12:07 PM
Good God Mr. Arkin...Your conclusions hit the nail on the head! Are you looking to be Tarred, Feathered and Ran out of town on the Rails by the Washington Power Brokers? You Broke the Code! One of the last things President Eisenhower warned the Nation about before leaving office was the Military Industrial Complex. Of the many things he had to worry about, why would he warn us about the Military Industrial Complex?
Posted by: M. Stewart | June 19, 2006 10:24 AM
Bill, what you seem to be describing here is the ievitable fate of any organization that has become so large and unweildy that it can no longer effectively function. A brief reprise of history informs that all past empires have taken on this curious tendency toward excess and incompetence in their declining years.
The growth of all of these selfish entrprises who infest Washinton DC in the same manner as viruses affect a healthy functioning body is the inevitable outcome of an organization--and governments are the ultimate form of organization--which has grown above the level of its competence.
Greece, Egypt, Rome, Europe and now America, have all gone through that period in their history when they were vital, youthful, vigorous and foward looking. What is happening in Washington DC is nothing new. It has happened to all great empires of the past.
Much has been written of late concerning America as the one "indispensable" nation. Our politicians are forever issuing forth arrogant rhetoric about American "exceptionalism". Utterly ludicrous and in the final analysis, futile. Rome saw itself in the etrnal role of civilizing the world. Gret Britain was filled with such hubris during its Imperial years.
The curious thing about America is that its people somehow think that they--and they alone--will escape the inevitable fate of all empires: the natural evolution and growth that we see in the cosmos around us when a star moves into its final stages before it collapses inward upon itself.
Hate it as we must, we have to accept the fact that we are no more the master of our destinies than are the burnt out stars in the far reaches of the cosmos whose past energies are detectable to us, yet have long ago departed.
Posted by: Jaxas | June 19, 2006 10:20 AM
The real problem is the money; a SES or 4 star general is paid peanuts compared to what his civilian equivalent gets at fortune 500 company, so when they leave office they are looking for the big bucks. I see it all the time at the Pentagon, former SES and General officers coming back in the door to sell products and services. I don't think its so much a matter of real impropriety, its just that they have the access and contacts, one phone call and they have a high level office call with a real decision maker that an outsider would never obtain. In the end this country would be far better off if we paid our SES/Generals/Congressman $1M a year each, but precluded them from ever working in their established fields again after they "retire".
Posted by: COOP | June 19, 2006 10:08 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.

I can see that I certainly don't blend in the machine, but they may or most likely will not want me to provide anything for anything, since I charge for my services. I tried to climb the corporate ladder on all ends of the political spectrum, but have hit every pothole in the road. I am quite certain that has been arranged by digital dictators. I don't want to complain or even try to rearrange things, but I am just a working class bohemian that wants oportunities to earn a decent living. There have been some good deeds done for my progressive issues, but there have been quite a few obstacles. I have accurate knowledge of where these are coming from,and have told the superiors of what they are and what to do, but have surmised that economic balance is the most vital defense against terrorism, and this is what is fueling terrorism. Self defeat and helplessness are their most valuable tools. If one can re engineer passive resistance and be able to fight and confirm victory, then we will succeed. The primary concern is for the fight of terrorism and protecting our citizens and military/employee personnel. By the way, this is coming from "someone" who has successfully completed a "going on" 3 year completely unpaid "internship" with the United States Federal Government. That is the reason that there are jobs in DC, but no one willing to fill them. I refused to "submit" (ha ha)oh...oops!p.s. I am a female) to the majority,whoever they may be is unknown, even though I support their policies, to some majority of degree. I have found a sanctuary for my progressive initiaves and deep pocket support for my number one iniative:education. Thanks for lending a sympathetic ear! P.S. Still waiting for my paycheck!!!