April
12, 2005
Treasury Department Has Fallen on Hard Times
By Bruce
Bartlett
As taxpayers
file their returns this week, the agency that administers the
tax system is under siege. An unusually large number of senior-level
positions at the Treasury Department are vacant, and increasingly
it appears to be out of the loop on key issues within its purview.
This downgrading of the second-ranking department in government
is one reason why President Bush is having trouble pursuing his
domestic agenda.
I was working
at Treasury in 1989 during its 200th anniversary. President George
H.W. Bush got a big laugh from the crowd when he noted that George
Washington had nominated Alexander Hamilton to be secretary in
the morning, he was confirmed by the Senate the same afternoon
and sworn into office that evening.
In 1789,
a good chunk of the entire federal government resided at the Treasury
Department. Over the years, many of these functions, such as the
Coast Guard, have been stripped away and given to other departments.
Just recently, the Department of Homeland Security was given several
Treasury bureaus, including the Secret Service and the Customs
Service.
Nevertheless,
Treasury has always been the premier economic agency of the government.
Generally speaking, the Treasury secretary is the administration's
principal economic spokesman, and the department attracts the
best and brightest of those with an economic bent who wish to
serve in government. This was especially the case during the Clinton
administration, which had an extremely high level of talent at
Treasury.
The department's
expertise has been sorely missed during the Social Security reform
debate. It is now clear that the White House put insufficient
resources into developing its proposal -- such as it is, with
no detailed plan yet on the table. As chairman of the board of
trustees of the Social Security system, the Treasury secretary
ought to have been at the forefront of developing this plan. Instead,
he has been used only as a salesman.
Today, Treasury
has fallen on hard times. The first secretary of the Bush administration,
Paul O'Neill, was summarily fired for reasons that are still unclear.
The current secretary, John Snow, was publicly humiliated when
the White House let it be known that it was searching for a replacement
last year. Snow was retained only because the White House apparently
couldn't find who it was looking for.
Now, most
of the key sub-Cabinet positions are vacant, and it appears that
the administration is having great difficulty filling these positions.
Among those currently vacant are the deputy secretary, two of
the three under secretaries, five assistant secretaries and a
number of other key positions. In some cases, nominations are
pending, but in others there is no one even in the pipeline.
This is really
quite amazing, because normally Treasury has no trouble attracting
very high quality people for its senior positions. Those I worked
with were very impressive, and many went on to greater things.
But now, it seems that the prospect of working there has become
significantly less attractive. There are several possible reasons:
-- All
power is centralized in the White House, and the department
really has no control over the issues that are its responsibility.
According to the new issue of International Economy magazine,
White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Deputy Chief of Staff
Karl Rove, and Office of Management and Budget Director Joshua
Bolten make all economic policy decisions. The Treasury secretary
is not involved.
-- People
are reluctant to work for a secretary who appears to have lost
the president's confidence and may be a short-timer.
-- They
don't want to waste their time giving speeches to high school
classes in North Dakota or local businessmen in Montana, as
Snow has been doing. He should be using his limited time more
effectively on things like tax compliance, stabilizing the dollar,
fighting protectionism, and financing the huge budget and current
account deficits.
In other
words, people want to work at Treasury to do what the department
historically does -- develop tax and financial policy, manage
exchange rates and other international economic issues, and be
the administration's principal liaison to Wall Street. Giving
speeches to high school students and being forced to implement
policies that Treasury had little say in developing just isn't
as interesting.
Add to this
the fact that the nomination and confirmation process has become
even longer and more burdensome in recent years, and one can easily
understand why people would avoid the prospect of working at Treasury.
The problem
is that we have a Treasury Department for a reason. It fulfills
a necessary governmental function even in a minimalist state.
One of these days, we may have some sort of financial crisis that
will demand the full use of Treasury's expertise. I just hope
there is someone there to answer the phone when that day comes.
Copyright
2005 Creators Syndicate
Send
This Article to a Friend