One reason for changing administrations is to relieve government from the burden of lessons learned too well. Every administration makes mistakes, or has bad luck, and then spends the rest of its term overcompensating. The change of administrations allows a change in the story line and lets the new guys stop overcompensating.
Of course, the new guys immediately begin accumulating their own set of mistakes, bad luck, and overcompensation mechanisms. That's what seems to be happening as the White House vetting process is overhauled and tightened.
Let's not forget the lesson offered by the 9/11 Commission. Vetting and confirmation delays meant that much of the Bush homeland security team had barely come on board by September 11, 2001. With a Democratic Senate, and the lessons of the Commission in mind, this Administration ought to move faster, not slower, on security nominees. I hope they're not just focused on the most recent problem.
Of course, the new guys immediately begin accumulating their own set of mistakes, bad luck, and overcompensation mechanisms. That's what seems to be happening as the White House vetting process is overhauled and tightened.
Let's not forget the lesson offered by the 9/11 Commission. Vetting and confirmation delays meant that much of the Bush homeland security team had barely come on board by September 11, 2001. With a Democratic Senate, and the lessons of the Commission in mind, this Administration ought to move faster, not slower, on security nominees. I hope they're not just focused on the most recent problem.
Comments