GovernmentExecutive.com

Fred Thompson may understand that the real money in deficit reduction comes from entitlements reform, but apparently he's not going to be able to resist the temptation to package together some more conventional attack-the-bureaucracy proposals aimed at burnishing his small-government credentials.

In the Wall Street Journal's opinion section today, Kimberly A. Strassel writes, "According to a campaign source, in upcoming weeks Mr. Thompson will unveil plans to reduce federal spending by limiting nondefense growth to inflation, earmark reform, and a one-year freeze on the hiring of non-essential civilian workers and contractors."

Of course, that "non-essential" part, if it turns out to be true, is a rather gigantic loophole.

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has weighed in on the subject of tattoos and body piercings. They're misunderstood, NIOSH says:

For people who do not know much about the body art industry, tattoos and body piercings appear as permanent markings and decorative metal. But this industry is actually a unique form of art. Tattoo artists can honor people or memories that were an important part of a person's life. Body piercers intricately place each piercing to express a person's individuality or culture.

But, NIOSH warns, "body artists may be exposed to a bloodborne pathogen by getting stuck with a used needle or if blood splashes into their eyes, nose, or mouth." Ick.

So NIOSH officials met with a bunch of tattoo and body-piercing organizations and came up with a list of things that can be done to reduce the risk of spreading diseases. The list includes vaccinating and educating, preventing needlestick injuries and reducing cross-contamination.

The Army's top acquisition official, retired Gen. Claude M. Bolton Jr., is on the way out, the New York Times reports today. Bolton, a retired two-star Air Force general who made the unusual switch to a top civilian position in another military service six years ago, plans to leave on Jan. 2.

There's a brief profile of Bolton in the Sept. 15, 2005 issue of Government Executive.

There was a moment in the CNN-YouTube Republican debate last night when Fred Thompson gave as honest an answer as I think you'll ever hear from a politician on reducing federal spending.

Asked what three programs he would cut to help balance the budget, Thompson responded this way:

The problem is that most of the programs we talk about, the ones that get the headlines, would not begin to solve the problem. ... That's why I have laid out a program not to attack entitlements, but to save Social Security. ... Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are the ones we're really going to have to reform if we're going to make any headway on the spending.

Rudy Giuliani was at it again last night in the CNN-YouTube Republican debate. Asked what he would do to reduce the national debt, he once more took the opportunity to flog his pet proposal to slash federal spending and the federal workforce. Here's what he said:

I think you have to do across-the-board spending cuts like Ronald Reagan did -- 5, 10 percent per civilian agency. It should be done right now, actually. President Bush should do it to strengthen the dollar. We should commit not to rehire half of the civilian employees that will retire. That's 42 percent of the federal workforce that will retire in the next 10 years. Don't rehire half of them. Use technology -- one person doing the job of two or three. Every business has done it; the government has to do it.

Isn't it about time somebody started calling him on this stuff? Such as:

• Nobody knows how many federal employees actually will retire in the next 10 years. That 42 percent is merely a projection of people likely to retire based on estimates that have proven less than fully accurate in the past.
• Is Giuliani really in favor of a haphazard cut to federal operations based on who happens to retire? So if FEMA gets an unusually high number of retirements, he's fine with cutting our disaster response capability and potentially leaving excess capacity elsewhere?
• Government, just like the businesses Giuliani touts, already has replaced hundreds of thousands of workers with technology. Bill Clinton proudly claimed credit for slashing nearly 400,000 jobs during his administration, and agencies spent billions of dollars on technology (and contract workers) to continue to meet their missions. (By the way, does anybody think the federal government improved as a result?) Since George W. Bush took office, thousands of jobs have been added back, but mostly in the homeland security and defense areas. Does Mr. 9/11 really think that those are the jobs that we need to eliminate?

As I've said before, issues like these are simply too important to let candidates slide by with glib promises.

Today's breaking news is that Gen. Richard Cody, the Army's Vice Chief of Staff, has issued a memo ordering commanders to plan for furloughs of civilians and contract workers if members of Congress can't iron out their differences on an Iraq spending bill.

"Military manpower, if available at your location, will be authorized to replace civilian and contractor workforce," Cody writes. " Military personnel other than those preparing to deploy should be considered available."

Here's the text of the memo:

-----Original Message-----
From: Cody, Richard A GEN VCSA
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 7:32 PM
To:

VCSA SENDS

TO ALL COMMANDS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT: Contingency Budget Planning

REF A. SecDef Memo, 16 NOV 07, Subj: Contingency Budget Planning

REF B. SecArmy and CSA Memo, 20 NOV 07, Subj. Contingency Budget Planning

REF C. VCSA Email, 26 SEP 07, Subj. Outlook for Funding in FY 2008

1. The FY2008 DoD Appropriations Act did not provide funds for the Global
War on Terror (GWOT) and we do not know at this time when or if the GWOT
funds will be approved by Congress.

2. References A and B directed that we take immediate action to begin
planning to reduce operations at all Army bases. This message provides
instructions for developing these plans. Send your initial plans through
your RM channels. They are due on 4 DEC 2007. Your plans will be reviewed

by a G3-led task force here at HQDA.

3. This is a planning effort, repeat, a planning effort to reduce OMA
funded operations to the minimum mission essential level. Your initial
plans will identify the weekly cost to continue those OMA funded minimum
mission essential activities allowable under Feed and Forage after 23
February 08 and will include the amount of OMA funds available for return to
the Department when all other services and functions are discontinued.

Guidance in reference C stands; take no action at this time to slow any
program. Continue to execute your approved programs and do not implement
any spending restriction or reduction in the scope and pace of operations
until notified. Continue following existing guidance to review civilian
hiring actions and contracts.

4. Include these assumptions in your plans:

a. On or about 22 February 08, all distributed Operation and Maintenance,
Army (OMA) funds will be fully obligated or committed.

b. On 23 February 08, installations and commands will move to a "warm base"

status and all OMA funded activities will cease except those noted in
paragraph 4 below.

c. Civilian furloughs may last more than 30 days and therefore require a 60
day notice.

d. Military manpower, if available at your location, will be authorized to
replace civilian and contractor workforce. Military personnel other than
those preparing to deploy should be considered available.

e. Only direct funded OMA activities are affected. Programs, projects and
activities funded with other than OMA will continue as planned.

5. Your plans should identify the minimum mission essential activities
along with their estimated costs that are permissible by Feed and Forage (if
approved by OSD) and the impact of discontinuing all other services and
functions effective 23 February 08. For these planning purposes, consider
the following as minimum mission essential operations:

a. To protect the life, health and safety of occupants and residents of
Army installations.

b. To protect and maintain assets vital to the national defense.

6. Your plans should also provide a separate estimate of the weekly minimum
essential costs in order to determine what is permissible under Feed and
Forage:

a. Support forces deployed overseas including Europe, Korea, Japan and
COCOM activities.

b. Prepare forces for deployment to include recruiting, individual training
and unit training.

7. The ASA(FM&C) will provide a reporting format through RM channels. You
should be prepared to report the following information:

a. Life, Health and Safety. Those activities and services and their
estimated weekly cost that must be continued to protect occupants and
residents of Army installations to include military, civilians and Family
members.

b. Training. The amount of OMA funds by week necessary to support training
activities for deploying forces.

c. Quality of Life. Those activities and services for Soldiers and
Families that will be impacted and/or terminated once all existing OMA funds
are fully obligated or committed.

d. Depot Level Reset. To the maximum extent possible, plan to work off FY
07 carry over and new orders received from customers funded with other than
OMA appropriations. Identify the amount of OMA (both base and GWOT) by week
necessary to fund only the organic depot work required to keep production
lines operating and the total amount of OMA Reset funds available for
return.

e. Recruiting: Report the minimum weekly cost to continue to recruit the
force and train the load.

f. Mobilization and Demobilization: Provide the weekly cost to continue
mobilization and demobilization activities to support rotations into and out
of theaters of operation.

g. Field Level Maintenance: Plan to suspend all field level maintenance
except that necessary for life, health or safety or to support the war
fight. Provide the weekly cost for the latter.

8. In the report, you will be asked to break out the activities in
paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 into these categories:

a. Civilian Personnel. Identify the number of minimum mission essential
(Life, Health and Safety) and non-mission essential civilian personnel
funded through direct OMA appropriations. You should anticipate that the
Department will issue furlough notices to civilian employees with sufficient
lead time to implement a furlough on or about 23 February 08. For foreign
national personnel, provide the equivalent of furlough procedures under the
respective Status of Forces Agreement. Identify the weekly payroll cost of
mission essential civilian personnel. Furlough dates will be provided for
US Civilian personnel by G1.

b. Contracts. Identify the total amount of OMA funds needed for minimum
mission essential contracts. Also identify the amounts that can be returned
to the Department when all other services and functions are terminated or
suspended on or about 23 February 08. Factor in termination costs before
reporting the amount available for return.

9. DoD is considering the use of other authorities, Feed and Forage for
example, to continue essential operations as directed. The ASA(FM&C) will
issue instructions on these special funding authorities. The G1 will
provide additional guidance on civilian furloughs.

10. POCs are:

It's time for federal agencies to stop using the special Outstanding Scholar and Bilingual/Bicultural hiring authorities, the Office of Personnel Management says. The agency "strongly advises against further use" of the authorities, officials said in a statement issued earlier this month.

The programs were created after a 1981 lawsuit challenged the civil service hiring examination on the grounds that it discriminated against blacks and Hispanics. They enabled agencies to circumvent the traditional civil service hiring process to bring highly talented students and minorities into the workforce quickly. But after years of use, the two hiring authorities came under fire themselves. Last year, the Merit Systems Protection Board said agencies couldn't use them unless they also applied veterans preference procedures. OPM says that just isn't possible, so agencies should quit using them altogether.

That still leaves the Federal Career Internship Program as an option for agencies looking to make quick non-traditional hires. But as Karen Rutzick reported earlier this year, that program, too has come under legal fire.

The Transportation Security Administration is taking over the job of conducting background checks on more than 1 million aviation industry employees, USA Today reports. The Federal Aviation Administration has been conducting such checks since the 9/11 attacks. Now TSA is stepping up investigations in an effort to deal with the possibility of attacks orchestrated by people like pilots, mechanics and flight attendants who don't have to go through standard security checkpoints.

They say an army travels on its stomach, but it also has to operate by the seat of its pants. And apparently the U.S. Army is having a little problem in that regard. USA Today reports that the Army is retrofitting 1 million uniforms worn by soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan because of reports of "crotch durability problems." Single-stitched seams in sensitive areas just aren't cutting it in the rough terrain in which soldiers are conducting operations.

Update: Anne Laurent reminds me that Government Executive was on the crotch reinforcement story back in May.

Interested in reading the latest federal ethics horror stories? The Defense Department's Standards of Conduct Office has updated its "Encyclopedia of Ethical Failure." (I wrote about the encyclopedia earlier this year.)

You can download the new version (it's a Microsoft Word document) here, or just get the latest updates here.

Some of the new entries:

• Affair with Assistant Leads to Employee Removal


• One Happy Family Spends Time Together in Jail


• Stealing Isn’t the Only Way to Misuse a Government Issued Credit Card


• Federal Employee Stole Credit Card Numbers to Hire Prostitutes (more on that here)


• Boyfriends Can Be Very Expensive For Employees Who Steal Funds


• Law Enforcement Official Fired for Landing Government Helicopter at His Daughter’s School


• 29-Year Veteran of the VA Loses Job Over Dirty Emails


• Stopping at the Base Eatery Not an “Official Visit”

(Hat tip: IEC Journal)

"USDA Concludes Genetically Engineered Creeping Bentgrass Investigation"

Remember the mini-flap over the CQ Homeland Security report that FBI agents in San Francisco were tracking sales of falafel and other Middle Eastern foods at local markets in the hopes that the data might lead them to Iranian secret agents? Well, FBI higher-ups have looked into the whole situation and their official response is that the story is "too ridiculous to be true."

"I spoke to the counterterrorism managers, who in the story were identified as having hatched the plan, as well as everyone else who would have had any knowledge of it," says John Miller, head of the FBI's Office of Public Affairs. "Nobody did."

Need to get some early holiday shipping done? The Postal Service is offering an early treat: A bunch of free stuff, from package pickup to shipping supplies.

The Campaign for America's Future wants Consumer Product Safety Commissioner Nancy Nord out of her job, arguing that she isn't sufficiently committed to getting more resources for the agency to step up inspections of toys for dangers like lead-based paint. And the organization has enlisted Barbie into its cause:

(Hat tip: Washington Post)

Fox News reported yesterday that the Homeland Security Department wants firefighters to take on a new role in the fight against terrorism. (See the video here.) DHS is training firefighters to be on the lookout for suspicious characters and stuff like bomb manuals, blueprints and night vision goggles when they find themselves in private homes. The idea here is that firefighters, unlike police officers, don't need warrants to take a look around when they're in somebody's house.

(Hat tip: Boing Boing)

Well, President Bush didn't pardon my turkey, so I'm looking forward to some fine holiday eating. Fedblog will be back on Monday.

Happy Thanksgiving to all!

Carol Brown has a problem.

She's a member of the Hailey, Idaho, city council. And that body just passed a series of measures to water down its laws against marijuana use. The Idaho Mountain Express reports that the measures also require city officials to lobby for reform of marijuana laws statewide. That presents a problem for Brown, because she is a federal employee, and as such, can't do such lobbying under federal ethics laws.

"Council member Brown will have to recuse herself from any discussion of these laws in order to retain her federal position," city officials noted in a press release. "Stated differently, council member Brown may have to resign from the Hailey City Council."

Jeff Klein of CQ Homeland Security notes one reason diplomats didn't respond with relish to the notion of forced assignments to Iraq: "Wrecked physically and mentally from terrorist attacks or duty in combat zones," he writes, "State Department employees from senior diplomats on down to foreign aid workers say they have too often had to fend for themselves when they were hurt."

GovExec's Alyssa Rosenberg reported on this issue back in August, as did Brittany Ballenstedt in June.

While we're at it, here's some more perspective on the whole issue of directed assignments, courtesy of commenter Doug Ellrich on a previous item I wrote:

There is a lot of misinformation about this issue. Not one single FSO has refused, or even attempted to refuse an assignment to Iraq. There is just no truth to that belief. Sending FSOs to Iraq cannot be compared to sending soldiers and sailors to Iraq. DOD creates an entire cacoon around their people that includes families. DoD families live in familiar communities for several years while the soldier is deployed. They go to familiar schools, are supported by extensive social support systems. FSOs families will be relocating for the year of the Iraq assignment, attending unfamiliar schools in unfamiliar communities. Nothing like what DoD provides exists for the FSO families who are left behind. Most of the concern from FSOs has nothing to do with their personal safety or desire to serve in Iraq, it's usually about specific family situations. Only 16% of the military has served or ever will serve in Iraq and Afghanistan. Already 25% of all FSOs have served in Iraq or/and Afghanistan, and the number will go higher as time goes by. That doesn't even include the FSOs who go to all the other dangerous posts abroad and leave their families behind. 65% of the FSOs are abroad serving, mostly in dangerous posts. Only 16% of uniformed personnel are overseas at any one time. DoD is so huge compared to the Foreign Service. It has more bandmembers than there are members of the Foreign Service total. If the State Department had as extensive a support system for families left behind as DoD does, there would be less concern. But in any case, FSOs do serve, they don't refuse, and that will always be the case.

Embattled Minnesota U.S. Attorney Rachel Paulose -- whose 20-month tenure was marked by sharp disagreements with her staff and the resignations of several top officials -- is on the way out. The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports that Paulose announced yesterday that she will be returning to Washington to take a job at Justice Department headquarters.

Paulose had been caught up in this year's controversy over the Justice Department's handling of U.S. attorneys, largely because of her friendship with key Alberto Gonzales aide Monica Goodling. But the main problem seems to be that she couldn't win the support of career attorneys in her office.

The Washington Post quotes an anonymous source "familiar with the decision" as saying Paulose "has come to realize, and the new attorney general and others, that management was a challenge for her there. She felt it was best for her office for her to . . . get out of this management position and into a place where she could excel."

Still unclear is what will happen to the Office of Special Counsel investigation into allegations that Paulose mishandled classified information and retaliated against career employees who challenged her management style.

Thanks to Chris Dorobek of Federal Computer Week for linking to this Wall Street Journal piece I missed on Mitt Romney's management style. Romney was a consultant for 10 years, and it's pretty clear he'd bring that perspective to bear in running the executive branch.

Here's the key section of the article:

When asked for details about how he would reduce the size of government if elected, he mentions two things: The organizational chart of the executive branch, and consultants. "There's no corporation in America that would have a CEO, no COO, just a CEO, with 30 direct reports."

Running a government organized like this is, he explains, impossible. "So I would probably have super-cabinet secretaries, or at least some structure that McKinsey would guide me to put in place." He seems to catch a note of surprise in his audience, but he presses on: "I'm not kidding, I probably would bring in McKinsey. . . . I would consult with the best and the brightest minds, whether it's McKinsey, Bain, BCG or Jack Welch."

Dorobek also notes that after the Journal piece appeared, TIME columnist Michael Kinsley took some potshots at Romney, consultants and the whole concept of trying to introduce businesslike efficiency into government. "The notion that the cacophony of politics can be replaced with the smooth hum of expertise and that all the challenges our society faces can be solved by making the government run more efficiently has a long and generally laughable history," Kinsley wrote -- and a bipartisan one, too.

The employees of the Office of Governmentwide Policy at the General Services Administration have given agency administrator Lurita Doan an early Christmas present: a check for $2 million. That's how much the employees of the office saved through efficiency improvements, officials say.

Now Doan just needs to decide what to do with the money. Kevin Messner, acting associate GSA administrator in charge of OGP, has an idea: "It is my hope that the money will remain unspent and thus contribute to reducing the federal deficit," he says.

Looking to get a good return on the tax dollars you've "invested" with Uncle Sam? Try heading for the Dakotas. South Dakota taxpayers get back $1.53 for every dollar they send to Washington, the Sioux Falls, S.D. Argus-Leader reports. And North Dakota resident do even better, getting back $1.68. Census Bureau figures show that in fiscal 2005, South Dakota received $7.4 billion in direct expenditures or obligations from the federal government, up from $3.8 billion a decade earlier.

Over at The Atlantic, James Fallows has some bad news about the Bush administration's much-hyped plan to open up military airspace to ease air traffic congestion over the Thanksgiving weekend. In Fallows' words, the idea is "preposterous," and "will not make the slightest difference in airline delays or the general neuralgia of Thanksgiving travel." Not only is there little military airspace near places that experience the most congestion, it's already routinely opened to civilian traffic over the holidays.

So the State Department has determined that it has all the volunteers it needs to fill positions in Iraq, and won't have to force diplomats to go to the country against their will. Which begs the question: From a management perspective, wouldn't it have made more sense to make that determination before telling people they'd be forced to go if the department couldn't find sufficient volunteers? Why create all kinds of angst in your workforce when it turns out you didn't need to? The answer isn't that State needed to send a message that forced assignments might be coming. That message already had been sent loud and clear.

This part of Alyssa Rosenberg's story yesterday on the perils of falling back on generational stereotypes in recruiting really stood out to me:

According to an upcoming MSPB study that will include a review of hiring records and a survey of 2,000 federal employees who were hired in 2005, young employees say they valued the stability of federal government jobs and the pensions and traditional benefits that come with those jobs as highly as their predecessors, and they value these even more highly than workplace flexibilities.

That finding doesn't exactly surprise me. When you set up and perpetuate a system in which the primary value proposition for prospective employees is job security and traditional benefits, then you're going to end up with a self-selected set of workers who value those things -- no matter what generation they come from. And you'll miss out on a whole lot of other highly talented potential employees who are more interested in things like workplace flexibilities and the opportunity to advance quickly. That doesn't seem to me like a path toward attracting the best and the brightest.

Here's just a sampling of headlines from today's Washington Post:

• State Dept. Won't Order Diplomats to Iraq
• TSA Minimizes Failure to Detect Threats
• FEMA Accused Of Wasting More Katrina Funding
• Justice Dept. Conducting Criminal Probe of Baghdad Embassy Contracts

This is a pretty typical day for the newspaper. Can there be any doubt at this stage that management of federal operations is not just something that's worthy of the next president's attention, but the critical issue facing the country in the next few years? If recent history has taught us anything, it's that we should be judging our candidates on the basis of how well they will manage the critical functions of the federal government, which are literally a matter of life and death to Americans. And we should be holding their feet to the fire when they make cavalier policy proposals like not replacing half of federal employees who retire and threatening to cut health benefits for political appointees.

While presidential candidates like to focus on policy proposals, and political reporters remain obsessed with the who's-up-who's-down horse race aspects of the campaign, the critically important issue is whether the next president will form an effective team of appointees, make sure agencies have the capacity to perform the roles they've been assigned, and hold federal managers and executives accountable for results. This issue ought to be central to the campaign, and its barely on the periphery.

Can you sell the concept of activist government like it was a hip computer brand? Judge for yourself:

(Hat tip: Andrew Sullivan.)

The U.S. economy may be teetering on the brink of recession, but the marijuana market seems to be going strong. In just one four-day period, from last Friday to Monday, the Border Patrol in the Tucson Sector seized 9,121 pounds of weed, with an estimated street value of more than $7 million.

Memo to State Department Inspector General Howard Krongard: When a report by congressional Republicans who are trying to defend you against charges of political bias concludes that you have "an extraordinarily abusive management style," a "a poor regard for government workers," and that you'll "give anybody, any time, anywhere, a hard time," it might be time to rethink whether leading a very important federal operation is the right job for you.

Who gets affected most when gas prices keep going higher and higher? One likely answer, NPR reports today, is the U.S. military. Its 340,000-barrel-a-day rate of oil consumption would rank it 38th in the world if it were a country. The C-130 Hercules transport plane, to take just one Defense gas-guzzler, gets three gallons to the mile (that's not miles to the gallon).

So how does the Pentagon cope with rising fuel costs? "It is, in the short term, a management challenge," says Michael O'Hanlon, a former Defense Department budgeteer who's now with the Brookings Institution. "And there are many Pentagon comptroller types who are staying up late into the evening figuring out how to make this work."

John Edwards is still flogging his promise to cut off health care for members of Congress and senior administration officials if the legislative and executive branches fail to agree on a comprehensive health care reform bill within his first six months in office. In fact, Matt Yglesias notes, Edwards is even running ads in Iowa touting the idea.

This is a terrific rhetorical device, but if Edwards is even halfway serious about it, I hope he's going to think it through a little more. Say what you want about political appointees, but they already have enough incentives not to serve their country. Why add more in the form of uncertainty about benefits? Here's what would be truly political courageous: For one of Edwards' opponents to say, "I see your point, John, but getting the most highly qualified and talented people to run government's programs and operations is too important to play games with the basic benefits they might receive in exchange for agreeing to serve and to help lead the effort to make government as efficient and effective as possible."

For all the talk about federal employees who can't wait to get out of government, some people would do just about anything to get in -- or at least to pretend they're in. The Associated Press reports that a federal judge in Amarillo, Texas, has sentenced Christopher Wayne Ralston to 12 months in prison for impersonating a high-ranking federal employee.

Ralston pretended he was a Justice Department "operations director," and convinced a homebuilder to construct a house for him by promising that Justice would wire him $320,000 to pay for it. Ralston also gathered personal information on 13 people under the guise of having them fill out applications for "national security positions."

It looks like Ralston will get his wish in a way: If he gets a prison job, he'll be working for the Justice Department -- just for a lot less than $320,000.

From the Justice Department: Jury Convicts South Dakota Hotel Owners on Federal Peonage and Document Servitude Charges.

If, like me, you had no idea what "peonage" is, I'll spare you the trouble of looking it up. It's the "status or condition of compulsory service, based upon indebtedness." That's right: this case is about a down-home Midwestern couple who basically forced a group of Philippine immigrants to work around the clock without pay at the Comfort Inn & Suites hotel they run in Oacoma, S.D.

Interesting juxtaposition of stories on our home page today. First, Jill Aitoro uncovers the story of two more information technology vendors who have quietly dropped their General Services Administration schedule contracts, one of them openly citing "unreasonable demands" by the agency's inspector general.

At the same time, though, CongressDaily's Dan Friedman reports that a bipartisan group of senators are concerned about IGs who they say "work too closely with agency leaders or succumb to political pressure from the Bush administration." They're pushing a bill aimed at making IGs more independent by, among other things, prohibiting them from accepting bonuses from agency heads and reducing the control of agencies over IG pay.

While GAO and the unions are saying that Customs and Border protection has some serious staffing and training issues to deal with, the agency is pushing a different message. "CBP's front-line personnel were better equipped in fiscal 2007 than any period in the nation's history," agency spokesman Michael Friel told the Washington Times. The agency has made "significant progress" this year on securing the country's borders, he added.

Yikes! The Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday that the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum can't account for a whopping 80,000 of the 100,000 items it is supposed to have in its possession. The National Archives inspector general says a "near universal" breakdown in security left the facility vulnerable to theft from insiders.

The finding that Reagan's library was so poorly run, the paper reported, "may mortify fans of the late president, who often inveighed against government inefficiency."

Can you tell a terrorist by what he eats? Apparently FBI agents thought so.
CQ Homeland Security reported last week that FBI officials combed through sales records of Middle Eastern food at San Francisco-area restaurants grocery stores in 2005 and 2006, hoping that the data, along with other information, would lead them to Iranian secret agents operating in the United States. Apparently, higher-ups put a stop to the effort before it got very far.

(Hat tip: Danger Room.)

Before the flap over the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Halloween party fades into the mists of time, I can't resist asking a question: Somebody shows up to the party wearing a set of stereotypical cliches in the form of "dreadlocks, dark makeup and prison stripes," and their costume is deemed most original? What was everybody else at the party wearing? White sheets?

On second thought, I don't want to know the answer to that.

What's the biggest problem federal managers and supervisors face on a daily basis? Dealing with employee attendance issues, writes Bob Gilson in Fedsmith today. As much as 75 percent of day-to-day supervisory problems involve attendance, he says, outlining 10 steps for dealing with them.

The debate over potential forced reassignments of Foreign Service officers to Iraq has spilled over into Dipnote, the State Department's new blog. Yesterday, Dipnote posted an entry called "A Letter From Iraq to My Overwrought Colleagues" by John Matel, a career Foreign Service officer who leads the Provincial Reconstruction Team embedded in Al Asad in Al Anbar Province.

"Take a deep breath and calm down," wrote Matel. "I have been here for a while now, and you may have been misinformed about life at a PRT."

The "wailing and gnashing of teeth" about Iraq being a "death sentence" is "just way over the top," Matel said.

"We all know that few FSOs will REALLY be forced to come to Iraq anyway," he added. "Our system really does not work like that. This sound and fury at Foggy Bottom truly signifies nothing. Get over it! I do not think many Americans feel sorry for us and it is embarrassing for people with our privileges to paint ourselves as victims."

More than 15,000 people have appealed to the Transportation Security Administration since February to get their names off the terrorist watch list, USA Today reports. With requests coming in at the rate of 2,000 a month, TSA has been unable to meet its goal of processing them within 30 days. The list now totals more than 750,000 names.

Just in case you missed it, I wanted to draw your attention to this tidbit, courtesy of our friends at CongressDaily, about Congress' contingency planning for its ongoing failure to pass any appropriations bills -- more than a month into the fiscal year:

If Congress cannot get its work done in time for Christmas, as a fallback, federal agencies have already been instructed to plan as if Congress will eventually pass a CR running through Feb. 15, sources said.

Looks like we can count on budget uncertainty running well into the new year. Again.

Congratulations, Prince William County, Va.: You've managed to attract your first federal agency. InsideNoVa.com reports that in less than three months, almost 300 FBI agents and other bureau personnel will move from facilities in Tysons Corner to a brand new building at a business and technology park just outside Manassas.

Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell has issued her verdict on Robert O'Harrow's story about how the Air Force arranged a job through an intelligence contractor for Charles D. Riechers while he was awaiting confirmation as the service's top procurement official. After the story, which characterized Riechers' deal as a "no-work contract," appeared, he was later found dead of an apparent suicide.

The Air Force complained to Howell that the story was "highly misleading." Howell's conclusion: "There is nothing inaccurate in the story as a narrow slice of the contracting picture." But, she says, it "lacked important context -- whether such contracts are commonplace or unusual and what specific work Riechers did for [Assistant Air Force Secretary for Acquisition Sue C.] Payton under the contract."

As I've already noted, I think the Post's use of the term "no-work contract" to characterize the deal was unfortunate. Riechers, it seems clear, did in fact work -- just for the Air Force, not the company. The type of arrangement under which he worked, known as a "science, engineering and technical assistance" contract, is not uncommon in government. But, as Howell notes, procurement experts differ as to whether that makes it wise.

(Hat tip: IEC Journal.)

This Federal Times headline just about says it all: "One Solution to Staff Shortages: Hire Felons."

By the way, this is anything but a joke to Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., who is weighing whether to introduce a bill next year to make it easier for agencies to hire recently released felons. Under current rules, felons are eligible for federal jobs, but agencies can consider take felony convictions in to consideration in deciding whether to hire somebody.

By far, the most effective way for government to prevent ethical and legal abuses within its ranks is not to focus myopically on individual instances of wrongdoing as they occur, but to imbue one’s workforce with an affirmative, all-permeating sense of integrity -- to shine a light of excellence that dispels the shadows from which malfeasance sprouts.

(Hat tip: IEC Journal.)

Why do people choose to live in areas that pose risks from wildfires, hurricanes, and other threats? The "surprising" answer, according to National Science Foundation-funded researchers, is that they let their emotions get in the way of making rational risk assessments. That actually doesn't seem all that surprising to me.

"It's likely that people who live near heavily wooded areas in California focus on things they love about their location, like environmental beauty or proximity to the ocean, and simultaneously discount the risk of wildfire," says Jacqueline Meszaros, program director for decision, risk and management sciences at NSF.

Looks like I'm not the only baby boomer on a technicality who feels like a man without a generation. Here's Barack Obama (who was born in 1961) in a profile in the December Atlantic by Andrew Sullivan:

“My mother, you know, was smack-dab in the middle of the Baby Boom generation. She was only 18 when she had me. So when I think of Baby Boomers, I think of my mother’s generation. And you know, I was too young for the formative period of the ’60s—civil rights, sexual revolution, Vietnam War. Those all sort of passed me by.”

Did I read this story in The Hill correctly? I can't believe I did. Because it says that House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., has charged that DHS has so many vacancies in key positions that it resembles Swiss cheese. And that former DHS Deputy Secretary Michael P. Jackson actually wrote the following words to Thompson in a letter of response:

DHS’s leadership team would more fairly be compared to a fully intact wheel of the undisputed king of cheeses, Parmigiano Reggiano, carefully nurtured to maturity and ripe for superlative service. The number of unencumbered positions … is virtually nil.

The Center for Investigative Reporting and Salon have teamed up on a new report arguing that "federal whistleblowers almost never receive legal protection after they take action."

Among the alleged reprisals detailed:

• Joseph D. Whitson Jr. was a civilian chemist in the Air Force who spoke out about superiors falsifying drug test results. His desk was moved to a room in the basement and his job duties stripped.

• Vernie Gee Sr. was an agricultural inspector who sounded the alarm about tainted meat in the U.S. food supply and inspectors taking bribes from slaughterhouses. Gee was beaten up by a plant worker during an inspection -- and then reprimanded by superiors for fighting.
• George Randall Taylor, a chief of police at a Navy base in Bermuda, exposed coverups of rapes on the base. He was then forced into a psychiatric hospital.
• Before Teresa Chambers was fired from the Park Police, she found used condoms on her car, and someone pepper-sprayed her office door.

Of course, the report also notes that recent whistleblower cases "included one in which an employee sought protection after reporting missing candy bars at a government commissary. In another case, a worker complained about colleagues using a drinking fountain as a spittoon. One government worker was discovered by investigators to have fabricated his entire complaint. Most such cases, however, are weeded out of the system."

My favorite part, though, was the video highlighting the efforts of one of the pioneers of whistleblower protection legislation: Sen. Richard M. Nixon.

The stories about the town hall meeting at the State Department in which several diplomats complained about potential forced assignments to Iraq are certainly generating a lot of comment (see here and here). And I have to say, the diplomats aren't winning a lot of support.

In the midst of all the shouting, I thought this comment, from "Jake," offered some interesting perspective:

As one of the 2,000 or so FSOs who have volunteered so far to work in Iraq and Afghanistan, all I can say is cut us some slack. We're 68% forward deployed overseas. FSOs are around 20% already rotated through Iraq/Afghanistan, the percentage for the three services is about the same. Due to chronic shortfalls in hiring, the average FSO is pushing forty with family, but we still stepped up over the last three years. A fifth of overseas positions are now unaccompanied, most embassies have been ordered to do more to support GWOT while shedding positions to keep Iraq staffed, and the choice European posts were downsized years ago to fill "transformational diplomacy" slots in China, India, and other fun postings. So yeah, labor relations are stressed. It didn't help that the selected two hundred first heard about the draft from CNN Friday night.

I have no doubt that whiners in particular found the time to attend the Town Hall (I didn't), but I imagine legitimate questions were raised and the responses were less than convincing: will the extra slots for the Embassy in the Green Zone contribute or will those folks just get in the way? Will FSOs embedded at the brigade level have the professional experience, language, programmable funds, and access to Iraqi society to contribute to the reconstruction and stabilization mission or will they just be civilian targets w/o firearms?

Longtime Environmental Protection Agency employees don't exactly have fond memories of their former headquarters at the Waterside Mall complex in Washington. Maybe, EPA's deputy administrator writes, that's because of the sick building syndrome at the facility, or the high crime in the neighborhood. Whatever the reason, 300 people will gather today at Waterside Mall for a ‘demolition party’ celebrating its demise.

I have to say I was a little taken aback when I got this update in my e-mail from the backers of the U.S. Public Service Academy:

Any time you can get both Christ and Marx to endorse your proposal, you've really achieved something.