"Stop layering on dumb rules, start fixing the ones we have."
Amen. It will suck if things have to get even worse before they get better, but they *need* to get better. And I think you're 100% correct that public-sector employees who *want* to do a good job desperately want reform. I know from experience that nothing is more demotivating than being surrounded by people who "can't or won't do the job."
I think the bit on procedural fetishism is mostly correct, but I think misses a psychological point (putting aside the folks on power trips, which does happen, but not that often). If you're a federal employee and are trying to actually do your job, a fair amount of that is stuff you personally will think is unwise, unnecessary, counterproductive, or pandering. Because that's what congress has told you to do. The way you, or at least I, adjust to that psychologically is to say 'I may or may not be correct on the utility of this, but I am a civil servant, my job is to carry out the tasks provided by congress under the guidance of the president and his appointed leadership/policies.'
And that's the psychological out that means that, denying someone disability benefits because, hey, they help out around the house sometimes, so could work as a part-time janitor, isn't morally debilitating, merely unpleasant. That's the standard established by the courts and congress hasn't adjusted it, so it's the law of the land and I need to comply with that as a good civil servant (this obviously has some moral limits, but they very rarely come up in my experience).
But once you've taken that psychological step of accepting that your role genuinely is to be a servant of society and execute the policy laid out under the restrictions laid out...well, by what right do I decide 'eh, this bit of procedure is dumb and counterproductive to the overall goal of the project? It's exactly as much something I'm supposed to comply with as the desired end result of the action. Yeah, yeah, I'm supposed tobuild a project, I'm also supposed to comply with NEPA/ESA/NHPA/ETC. By what right do I prioritize one of those over the others?
ETA: Or, phrased differently, almost everyone thinks they're a problem solver, the question is, what's the problem they're solving? Is it how to build a project? Or how to comply with NEPA? Both of those are congressional mandates, after all.
You mention unions in passing, but the political economy of reforming union rent-seeking seems like it deserves more emphasis and discussion. It's such a big factor in all kinds of state capacity and barriers-to-abundance issues, not just civil service reform.
With Musk's recent comments on X calling out specific federal public servants, I think this optimism about what DOGE will do can be safely put to rest.
As a fellow infrastructure planner, I get and share your exasperation. I hope that, despite the trolling, these guys want to get credit for actually making stuff work.
I appreciate the sentiments, but I also understand what Elon and Vivek think they’ve been tasked to do.
As the spouse of a Federal Employee, I admit that I’m not totally objective here. (Her agency is largely self-funded, but legal rulings have interrupted that more than once…)
Congress needs to fix this, but they’d rather not.
Senator Paul’s “Penny Plan” was something when he came up with it years ago, but even that doesn’t come close to fixing the problems that have crept in.
Is this a case of do-something-even-if-it’s-wrong?
"Stop layering on dumb rules, start fixing the ones we have."
Amen. It will suck if things have to get even worse before they get better, but they *need* to get better. And I think you're 100% correct that public-sector employees who *want* to do a good job desperately want reform. I know from experience that nothing is more demotivating than being surrounded by people who "can't or won't do the job."
I think the bit on procedural fetishism is mostly correct, but I think misses a psychological point (putting aside the folks on power trips, which does happen, but not that often). If you're a federal employee and are trying to actually do your job, a fair amount of that is stuff you personally will think is unwise, unnecessary, counterproductive, or pandering. Because that's what congress has told you to do. The way you, or at least I, adjust to that psychologically is to say 'I may or may not be correct on the utility of this, but I am a civil servant, my job is to carry out the tasks provided by congress under the guidance of the president and his appointed leadership/policies.'
And that's the psychological out that means that, denying someone disability benefits because, hey, they help out around the house sometimes, so could work as a part-time janitor, isn't morally debilitating, merely unpleasant. That's the standard established by the courts and congress hasn't adjusted it, so it's the law of the land and I need to comply with that as a good civil servant (this obviously has some moral limits, but they very rarely come up in my experience).
But once you've taken that psychological step of accepting that your role genuinely is to be a servant of society and execute the policy laid out under the restrictions laid out...well, by what right do I decide 'eh, this bit of procedure is dumb and counterproductive to the overall goal of the project? It's exactly as much something I'm supposed to comply with as the desired end result of the action. Yeah, yeah, I'm supposed tobuild a project, I'm also supposed to comply with NEPA/ESA/NHPA/ETC. By what right do I prioritize one of those over the others?
ETA: Or, phrased differently, almost everyone thinks they're a problem solver, the question is, what's the problem they're solving? Is it how to build a project? Or how to comply with NEPA? Both of those are congressional mandates, after all.
You mention unions in passing, but the political economy of reforming union rent-seeking seems like it deserves more emphasis and discussion. It's such a big factor in all kinds of state capacity and barriers-to-abundance issues, not just civil service reform.
This strategy will backfire ..
With Musk's recent comments on X calling out specific federal public servants, I think this optimism about what DOGE will do can be safely put to rest.
i just don't think they care about federal rules or policy. alternatively, I'm sure this is all just trolling.
As a fellow infrastructure planner, I get and share your exasperation. I hope that, despite the trolling, these guys want to get credit for actually making stuff work.
i am here for the process if it works. we desperately need to fix how we build - and if doge takes this seriously…we’ll see
I appreciate the sentiments, but I also understand what Elon and Vivek think they’ve been tasked to do.
As the spouse of a Federal Employee, I admit that I’m not totally objective here. (Her agency is largely self-funded, but legal rulings have interrupted that more than once…)
Congress needs to fix this, but they’d rather not.
Senator Paul’s “Penny Plan” was something when he came up with it years ago, but even that doesn’t come close to fixing the problems that have crept in.
Is this a case of do-something-even-if-it’s-wrong?
Maybe.