"He [Gillespie] made an arbitrary decision that the RNC would cover Tobin's legal bills. Why? Because "it's the custom, not written anywhere, that you covered your people." - (N.B. according to Ken Mehlman [Current RNC Chairman], the RNC has since revoked this honorable, unwritten custom: "consulting contracts now explicitly declare that independent contractors must be prepared to pay their own legal costs in civil and criminal cases.") Having made that decision, he [Gillespie] then informed someone at the White House, he can't remember who, that he was going to abide by this unwritten rule. But this was just a heads up, a courtesy, not a dialogue. It was non-negotiable."So I guess that the fact the Tobin was the representative from the White House to the critical but close race for Senator in NH had nothing to do with it.
My observation has been that the members of the Bush administration trust people, not rules. What matters when trying to get something done is having a strong and ideologically reliable trusted leader who is loyal to the cause of the Bush administration on site. Rules are impediments to accomplishing the necessary task, so a strong effective leader is expected to ignore the rules when required to get the job done. A key element in this is that loyalty is a two-way street. The individual sent out is expected to be loyal to Bush, and can expect Bush's loyalty in return.
This is a feudal* way of thinking. People - strong leaders - get jobs done, not policies and plans. Rules, laws and bureaucracy simply get in the way of effective leadership. This is the mindset.
Of course, this also means that by being elected President, Bush believes that he has been given the absolute trust of the American people, and should not be hemmed in by unnecessary rules, bureaucracy or laws. This includes freedom from such impediments as the Constitution and oversight by Congress and the Courts.
The freedom to operate this way allows a great deal more flexibility to the operators, so it is often found in businesses that require flexible strategies. The oil industry, with its history of boom and bust, is a prime example of this. So is winning elections. But it does not work for running government.
Government establishes laws and enforces them, making it the polar opposite of this feudal way of thinking. Government is, of necessity, a bureaucratic and law-bound organization. It cannot work otherwise. Individuals cannot be allowed the freedom to decide not to pay taxes or to pollute the air and water. Not if society is going to continue to function.
I think the Tobin case is an example of why the Republicans are capable of winning elections but not capable of governing. They come from the feudal way of solving problems and where that works, they function superbly. But when the requirement is for long years of research and operating in a bureaucracy (like the Center for Disease Control or FEMA) they cannot manage the organization effectively. They operate by instinct and gut feel, and their instincts are wrong for the strange environment.
The Tobin case is another example of this.
* Don't mistake the term "feudal" for meaning "primitive." It's not. It was a very advanced way of operating government when the primary function of government was defense of relatively small towns and agriculltural villages against bandits and Vikings. But it does not do a good job of controlling a large organization, which is why effective government became bureaucrative government. Most people don't recognize bureaucracy until some rule interferes with what they want to do, so people only notice the problems that seem to be caused by bureaucracy.
Addendum May 20, 2006 10:23 AM
For an excellent account of the questions raised by the obviously excessive $3 million the Republican Party spent to defend James Tobin, go read EmptyWheel.
Question: What in Hell are the Republicans trying to hide?
No comments:
Post a Comment