De-Valuing the Government Brand
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press is out with a comprehensive report on President Bush and public opinion. I was particularly struck by this chart:
And by this explanation for it:
What might have damaged Bush’s legacy most was his administration’s mixed record of competent governance. Between Iraq, the government’s flawed relief effort in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and more minor missteps over the Dubai ports issue and other matters, the government “brand” deteriorated badly during the Bush years. In late April 2008, just 37% expressed a favorable view of the federal government, about half of the percentage of five years earlier (73%).
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Staff Correspondent Alyssa Rosenberg takes a look at news affecting the management and operations of the massive federal bureaucracy.
Referring to Bush's legacy as a "mixed record of competent governance" conjures the mental image of a pig wearing lipstick. I've no dog in your political party fight, but am capable of recognizing repudiation when I see it. Are you?
Lib R. Tarian Posted Monday, December 22, 2008 7:35 PMI believe that when the article refers to the "government brand" it is stating that the consumer or in this case the taxpayers perception of government as a whole is being driven by their disappointment in the administration. Therefore, people’s low opinion of the administration drives down their low opinion of local and state governments, even though these governments may be performing at the same or higher levels than they were 5 years ago. Taxpayers’ negative perception of the administration is also transferred to their opinions about government employees. That is why when you tell someone that you are a federal officer it is not unusual for them to look at you as if you just stole their bicycle. Oh well, c’est la guerre.
Odo Blue Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:01 AMCome on, now. When a president and Republican predecessors spend an inordinate amount of time "dissing" government--going so far as to intentionally place nincompoops in charge of agencies if for no other reason than to take steps to disembowel and then dismember them--is it any WONDER people lose confidence?
Jackson Richards Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 2:22 PMThe survey was conducted by the Pew Research Center hardly an unbiased source, why not use People for the American way or NAACP. All are left wing media groups.
I remember getting a reply from the a WashPost reporter over him using the term non biased in describing Pew. He was very candid in saying they were left wing but the editorial staff said that any time they referred to the Pew organization the term unbiased HAD to be used
dan ketter Posted Tuesday, December 23, 2008 6:39 PMdan ketter's insightful analysis of one tree sheds so little illumination on the forest being discussed, one suspects he's stuck on denial. FYI Sir, all efforts to relate "Bush's legacy" with "competent governance" are an affront to competence. Jackson Richards' views may be partisan, but their logic is unassailable. I share Odo Blue's concern that Bush has poisoned the well from which our government and its employees draw respect.
Lib R. Tarian Posted Wednesday, December 24, 2008 2:00 AMRemember Mark Twain?
"A patriot is one whom is loyal to his country ALWAYS, and to the administration WHEN IT DESERVES IT"
nmelendez Posted Wednesday, December 24, 2008 9:11 AMDisagreeing with Lib R Tarian, the term "mixed record of competent governance" is one of balance and extreme kindness when referring to the unfortunate current administration who not only tarred government but gave a black eye to average students everywhere, most of whom can recognize expertise in others and are capable of compassion for those less fortunate as well as for those in their charge.
Ted Bean Posted Wednesday, December 24, 2008 10:47 AMThe chart is interesting, however not surprising. As a federal employee, it has come to my attention that the federal government is still bogged down by an abundance of paperwork. That in itself brings our government wheel to a crawl. I bring this up as an example of the "government brand" that is outlayed to our taxpayers. As an avid critic of taxpayer dollars, I do my best everyday to deliver the best possible product and/or service to our customer (the public). As a graduate student in business, I have applied various analysis that typically is implemented in the private sector to the public arena and have correlated the dissected results to discover that if our government operated as a private business it would have been bankrupt a 100 years ago. There is no excuse for running a government like a bad business. Afterall, it is still a business and we should have accountability to taxpayers. No if's and's or but's about it. Our federal employees need to be responsive, alert, and adaptive to our customers needs and provide the type of public service that is expected of us. Maybe then we can build the public's trust in the government once more.
John Yeressian Posted Saturday, December 27, 2008 1:06 AM