Filenews 9 August 2024 - by David M Marchick
If a business school student had designed the U.S. president's transition process as a task, he would have failed the course. Because; Because the current system creates an almost impossible task for a newly elected candidate.
In less than 75 days, the president-elect must appoint hundreds of White House staff, select the cabinet and fill more than 4,000 politically appointed positions. The new government must quickly prepare a budget and get closer to its allies. No business would ever carry out such a change of head, and no other country follows a similarly flawed procedure.
The way a candidate prepares for the transition to the presidency is a good indication of how capable he will be to govern. It is therefore extremely irresponsible that former President Donald Trump has not appointed a director or transition team to prepare for his presidency should he be re-elected, nor has he publicly announced his plans to do so. At this time, four years ago, the Biden-Harris ticket had not only appointed transition directors, but had several hundred people working full-time on planning.
The 4,000 jobs to be filled are political positions, unlike public administration positions, which do not change with each new administration. They run through every department and department and at every level: from the Secretary of State to the person who drafts the briefing papers for the Secretary of State.
Believe it or not, transition planning has indeed improved since 1963, when Congress passed the Presidential Transition Act. In recent years, candidates have typically appointed interim officers in the spring of an election year, vetted candidates for appointments, plotted legislative priorities, and even obtained security clearances for national security appointees. Federal funds, government offices and technology will be available for both candidates' transition teams in the coming weeks.
The pattern for presidential transitions took place in 2008, when President George W. Bush was in his final year in office. Bush himself had experienced a very brief transition after the 2000 election — just 35 days — due to the recount in Florida. Months later, when terrorists struck the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, it had only half of its national security team in critical agencies.
With this experience, Bush in 2008 instructed White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten to roll out the red carpet for the next president, regardless of party. Bolten worked closely with the teams of John McCain and Barack Obama and instructed federal agencies on how to be ready for a new president.
Bush's decision proved prophetic: At election time, the U.S. was facing its worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Bipartisan cooperation between the outgoing administration and the new Obama team helped save the auto industry, secure emergency legislation and reassure financial markets that a recovery plan was underway.
By contrast, Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton had a poorly planned transition, albeit for different reasons. Carter was the first candidate to allocate funds and resources to plan the transition, but he did not inform his campaign officials of the preparation effort, causing a post-election conflict. Clinton, meanwhile, moved too slowly because he didn't want to appear to be making premature or unwarranted preparations before winning. Both men later admitted that poor transition planning brought back their early years in power.
Not surprisingly, then, Trump's moves in and out of office have been the most chaotic in modern history. However, this was not due to poor staffing, but to the fact that Trump personally blocked both processes. In May 2016, Trump appointed former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie to direct his transition. Christie organized a serious and effective effort, but was fired a few days after the election. The result was total chaos. A year into his term, Trump had filled only a quarter of the 1,250 jobs that needed Senate confirmation, the lowest percentage in modern history, hampering the effective management of government.
Trump's outgoing transition was also marred by dysfunction — again because of his behaviour. During the run-up to the 2020 election, Trump's then-deputy chief of staff, Chris Lindell, correctly followed Josh Bolten's playbook in 2008. Despite Lindell's good work, Trump delayed things for weeks by preventing agency employees from working with Biden's upcoming team. For example, the president-elect's staffers were barred from talking to government health experts about the distribution of the newly developed coronavirus vaccine.
This time, the fact that Trump hasn't organized a transition planning team could make him heavily dependent on two outside teams: the America First Transition Project and the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025. (While Trump has distanced himself from Project 2025, Heritage said it continues to focus on personnel issues.) This contradicts best practices, which dictate that a candidate has their own staff to vet and vet potential employees of the White House and agencies. Yes, the election campaign can receive information from partisan (and non-partisan) organizations and interest groups, but transition officials still have to make independent judgments about priorities. Staff cannot be outsourced.
Vice President Kamala Harris, if she wins, may in part look back to the experience of George Herbert Walker Bush, the last vice president to take over the White House. Bush organized a relatively small external effort to plan the transition while campaigning to succeed President Ronald Reagan. Although Harris' case is different because she entered the race so late, she will still have the advantage of being able to govern with a mix of new leaders and existing Biden appointees. It has the advantage of an experienced staff and the operation of White House staff, and can and should communicate immediately that transition planning is underway.
Regardless of party affiliation, all Americans benefit from thorough transition planning. History shows a high correlation between effective change and effective presidency and vice versa. Trump's lack of planning suggests that if he wins, even greater government chaos will follow.
Performance – Editing: Stathis Ketitzian
