[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 7 (Monday, January 22, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S380-S381]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FEINGOLD:
  S. 108. A bill to reduce the number of executive branch political 
appointees; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.


    legislation to Reduce the Number of Executive Branch Political 
                              Appointments

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I am pleased to reintroduce legislation 
to reduce the number of presidential political appointees. 
Specifically, the bill caps the number of political appointees at 
2,000. The most recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates of 
this measure is that it would save $382 million over the next five 
years, and $872 million over the next 10 years.
  The bill is based on the recommendations of a number of distinguished 
panels, including most recently, the Twentieth Century Fund Task Force 
on the Presidential Appointment Process. The task force findings are 
only the latest in a long line of recommendations that we reduce the 
number of political appointees in the Executive Branch. For many years, 
the proposal has been included in CBO's annual publication Reducing the 
Deficit: Spending and Revenue Options, and it was one of the central 
recommendations of the National Commission on the Public Service, 
chaired by former Federal Reserve Board Chairman Paul Volcker.
  Between 1980 and 1992, the ranks of political appointees grew 17 
percent, over three times as fast as the total number of Executive 
Branch employees and looking back to 1960 their growth is even more 
dramatic. In his book Thickening Government: Federal Government and the 
Diffusion of Accountability, author Paul Light reports a startling 430 
percent increase in the

[[Page S381]]

number of political appointees and senior executives in Federal 
government between 1960 and 1992.
  Mr. President, it is essential that any Administration be able to 
implement the policies that brought it into office in the first place. 
Government must be responsive to the priorities of the electorate. But 
as the Volcker Commission noted, the great increase in the number of 
political appointees in recent years has not made government more 
effective or more responsive to political leadership. Indeed, in their 
report, the Volcker Commission argued that the growing number of 
presidential appointees may ``actually undermine effective presidential 
control of the executive branch.'' The report went on to note that the 
large number of presidential appointees simply cannot be managed 
effectively by any President or White House. The Commission argued that 
this lack of control and political focus ``may actually dilute the 
President's ability to develop and enforce a coherent, coordinated 
program and to hold cabinet secretaries accountable.''
  Adding organizational layers of political appointees can also 
restrict access to important resources, while doing nothing to reduce 
bureaucratic impediments.
  In commenting on this problem, author Light noted, ``As this sediment 
has thickened over the decades, presidents have grown increasingly 
distant from the lines of government, and the front lines from them.'' 
Light added that ``Presidential leadership, therefore, may reside in 
stripping government of the barriers to doing its job effectively. . 
.''
  The Volcker Commission also asserted that this thickening barrier of 
temporary appointees between the President and career officials can 
undermine development of a proficient civil service by discouraging 
talented individuals from remaining in government service or even 
pursuing a career in government in the first place.
  Mr. President, former Attorney General Elliot Richardson put it well 
when he noted:

       But a White House personnel assistant sees the position of 
     deputy assistant secretary as a fourth-echelon slot. In his 
     eyes that makes it an ideal reward for a fourth-echelon 
     political type - a campaign advance man, or a regional 
     political organizer. For a senior civil servant, it's irksome 
     to see a position one has spent 20 or 30 years preparing for 
     preempted by an outsider who doesn't know the difference 
     between an audit exception and an authorizing bill.

  Mr. President, the report of the Twentieth Century Fund Task Force on 
the Presidential Appointment Process identified another problem 
aggravated by the excessive number of political appointees, namely the 
increasingly lengthy process of filling these thousands of positions. 
As the Task Force reported, both President Bush and President Clinton 
were into their presidencies for many months before their leadership 
teams were fully in place. The Task Force noted that ``on average, 
appointees in both administrations were confirmed more than eight 
months after the inauguration--one-sixth of an entire presidential 
term.'' By contrast, the report noted that in the presidential 
transition of 1960, ``Kennedy appointees were confirmed, on average, 
two and a half months after the inauguration.''
  In addition to leaving vacancies among key leadership positions in 
government, the appointment process delays can have a detrimental 
effect on potential appointees. The Twentieth Century Fund Task Force 
reported that appointees can ``wait for months on end in a limbo of 
uncertainty and awkward transition from the private to the public 
sector.''
  Mr. President, as we reduce the number of government employees, 
streamline agencies, and make government more responsive, we should 
also right size the number of political appointees, ensuring a 
sufficient number to implement the policies of any Administration 
without burdening the Federal budget with unnecessary, possibly 
counterproductive political jobs.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in 
the Record immediately following my remarks.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 108

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. REDUCTION IN NUMBER OF POLITICAL APPOINTEES.

       (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``political 
     appointee'' means any individual who--
       (1) is employed in a position on the executive schedule 
     under sections 5312 through 5316 of title 5, United States 
     Code;
       (2) is a limited term appointee, limited emergency 
     appointee, or noncareer appointee in the senior executive 
     service as defined under section 3132(a) (5), (6), and (7) of 
     title 5, United States Code, respectively; or
       (3) is employed in a position in the executive branch of 
     the Government of a confidential or policy-determining 
     character under Schedule C of subpart C of part 213 of title 
     5 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
       (b) Limitation.--The President, acting through the Office 
     of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel 
     Management, shall take such actions as necessary (including 
     reduction in force actions under procedures established under 
     section 3595 of title 5, United States Code) to ensure that 
     the total number of political appointees shall not exceed 
     2,000.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on 
     October 1, 2001.
                                 ______