I think that the essential issue here is how far down the pipeline the
direct politcal adgenda goes. The issue isn't whether it is Bush, but
whether any President should have his/her (hopefully one day) adgenda
directly influencing the lower echelon and middle managers (civil
service) in any of the federal departments. I am sure that if Clinton
had done the same thing there would have been the most strident
complaints about it.

Deb is right in respect that the President and his apponitees get to
choose the directors and assistant directors of agencies. But Indigo
is also right that the long-term civil service employees have rarely
had to  directly pledge allegence to any political adgenda. If the
policies are changed by Congress or by the director then usually
everyone must follow the new policies eventually.

Just seeing what happened during Hurricane Katrina with the FEMA
response should give anyone pause to consider if having the crony of
any politican in the manaagement of a critical agency is a good thing.

So if a democrat gets elected in 2008 do all of the Park's management
have to pledge support for them as well?

And these pledges have that same slimy feeling that the code words
"Support the Troops" has - that if you are opposed to the President
and his policies then you are a traitor to our Troops.

Sheer silliness!

The truth is that the National Parks are in increasing distress. They
are the one part of the government in the United States that the vast
majority of the population loves and they have been underfunded,
neglected, and are becoming increasingly open to incursions from
comercialism and even oil and gas exploration in selected parks. This
has a long history that encompasses several Presidential
administrations, although under Bush and his appointee Gail Norton the
adgenda has become very aggessive.

It is especially outrageous given the vast coporate welfare that is
doled out to business interests. And the famous funding for the bridge
to nowhere that was in the recently passed highway bill that is so
bloated that you can hear the oinks clear across the country here in
California.

I think that no matter your poliical persuasion that we can all agree
that this sort of nonsense must stop, and removing the influence of
business and ALL special interests from the political landscape would
be a healthy thing. Remember that influence has a way of seeping down
through the system to those middle and lower managers in civil service
that we have been talking about.

Cheers!
Dave

David Harvey
Conservator
Los Angeles, California, USA

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).