Transition: Heads We Win, Tails You Lose

As I write, the United States government is engaged in planning across federal departments for the transition to a new administration next year. That includes our own Department of Homeland Security, where Secretary Chertoff and I continue to pursue these efforts which began early last year.

As part of this planning, we’re filling some of the top jobs previously held by political appointees with career professionals. For example, last year, we made Jay Ahern, a 30-year veteran of the federal government, second-in-command of our Customs and Border Protection component. Just recently, at our Transportation Security Administration, we filled our deputy slot with Gale Rossides, who also has had a 30-year federal career and has served at TSA since its inception six years ago. And we are training and cross-training such senior career people to ensure that DHS will have the continuity of leadership it needs following the transition.

It’s important to realize that major terrorist attacks, both here and abroad, are often launched shortly before or after national elections or inaugurations. By promoting dedicated civil servants who’ve proven their mettle, we’re not only building for the future, but are helping ensure that during the transition, as the perceived weakness grows, our department is prepared.

This really is common sense, but try telling that to critics like Think Progress, a self-styled “progressive” blog. Writing last Thursday, its blogger begins by claiming we’ve filled too many positions with political appointees, all of whom are deemed “incompetent.” In fact, less than one-tenth of one percent of our 208,000-member workforce consists of appointees. And as for “incompetence,” good luck to anyone who can square that charge with the fact that there have been no follow-up attacks on our homeland since September 11th.

Now if Think Progress believes we have too many appointees, that must mean they support our promotion of civil servants to replace appointees, right? Wrong.

Referencing a Wall Street Journal article about our department, the blogger quotes a “government bureaucracy specialist,” who suggests that the next administration might question whether we’re promoting our career staffers based on political connections rather than merit.

Note the contradiction: we are accused of being too “political” by allegedly hiring too many appointees -- and we are accused of being too “political” for replacing outgoing appointees with career professionals.

Clearly, this is the old game of “heads-we-win-tails-you-lose.” A reasonable person might ask who is really playing politics here.

Regardless of what the critics may say, we remain committed to ensuring a smooth and successful transition for 2009. Our goal remains to pass along a strong and effective department capable of protecting our nation well into the 21st century. We will continue to pursue it with unswerving dedication in the days and months ahead.

Paul A. Schneider
Deputy Secretary (Acting)