The Politics of Shea-Porter's Amendment
So, the thing I don't understand about Carol Shea-Porter's amendment rolling back the National Security Personnel System is this: why didn't she call the Obama administration to coordinate it? The amendment was always going to conflict with the NSPS review the administration has under way. I don't see any particular reason the amendment HAS to be attached to the appropriations cycle. I understand Shea-Porter's desire to get things under way, but the review committee's going to issue its results in August or early September. Would it have been so disastrous for her to wait a couple of months, coordinate with the White House, and have everything go smoothly?
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.
Maybe she sensed the fix was in. OPM/DOD just gave NSPS a glowing review near the end of the year. Aside from Berry, has the leadership really changed? Obviously from Bunn's obfuscating blather and the response on DCIPS, DOD is still foursquare behind not just PfP but NSPS. She's going to drive a stake thru the heart of this evil beast and it was evil from its inception. Look at all the stuff they weren't allowed to do. It's right there with Nixon's wish to fire 10% a year without need to show cause to keep us on our toes. More power to her.
mike Posted Tuesday, June 30, 2009 4:26 AM