The U.S. Attorney Fiasco

The White House is once again digging foxholes. Will they circle the wagons or fix bayonets and charge headlong into the face of the infidel Democratic horde seeking the truth as to why eight U.S. Attorneys were fired?

Sitting as a U.S. Attorney for one of the 93 Districts in the United States is a plum patronage position. The President has the right to appoint anyone to that position whether it be based on merit or merely for being a friend of Uncle Joe’s favorite nephew. Likewise, as these Attorneys serve at the pleasure of the President, no explanation is necessary when the President decides to terminate their employment. Clinton, Reagan, and even the incumbent Bush cleaned house and brought in new talent when they became President.

The present case is slightly more delicate than the simple issuing of personnel changes by the White House Human Resource Officer. The evidence is becoming crystal clear that these Attorneys were let go not for poor performance as initially suggested, but rather for not playing the game by the same rules as the person who owns the ball. These prestigious positions were held hostage and the ransom amounted to succumbing to subtle coercion to direct criminal cases within their jurisdictions along paths advantageous to the White House. Extortion is a word that comes to mind.

All the facts are unclear at this time. It may take some time to realize how far up the food chain the charges travel. What is obvious though is that the White House will fight tooth and nail to check any attempts by the Democrats to fully investigate the allegations. Bush won’t permit his staff to be questioned by Congress in open session, under oath or with the benefit of a transcript. He cites the time honored principle and worn out cliché - Executive Privilege - as the reason. During the time that electronic eavesdropping was being defended by the administration as a necessary tool, we often heard the phrase, “If you don’t have anything to hide, you shouldn’t be afraid.” Do these words hold true for all or a few?

I’ll give the President the benefit of the doubt in this case. With all the day-to-day problems he faces, he may truly be out of the loop in some personnel decisions. I hope that “Radar” Rove didn’t slip Mr. Bush a memo to be signed while the President was in a “Col. Henry Blake” state of mind.

Mr. Attorney General: Please remember that the President had all the faith and confidence in Donald Rumsfeld two weeks before he was sent packing. While your performance evaluations may be exemplary, you “serve at the pleasure of the President.”

Hope For The Future?

The clock is winding down for the St. Louis Public School District. The State Board of Education has scheduled a vote today to remove the District’s accreditation and replace the current elected school board and position a new CEO on the bridge of a capsizing ship. State takeover was imminent and anyone shocked by the drastic measure has been out of the loop for a long time. Why did it take the State so long to open the curtains and see the storm clouds hanging overhead? State Education Commissioner D. Kent King has expressed regret that something was not done sooner.

There is no denying that a school district the size of St. Louis’ is bound to have some problems. Effective leadership with the School Board, the Board of Education, and the Superintendent striving to pull together with an emphasis on a common goal could have saved the District. But years ago the pitter-patter of little politician feet became more noticeable as board elections neared. Slates of candidates were formed and endorsed. Candidates were no longer lured to the position by a sense of civic pride or community involvement. A seat on the board became a quest for power, political power. Accusations of improprieties filled the media. The slide down the slippery slope became slicker and quicker.

Board members engaged in constant bickering and infighting. Nasty emails, threats of violence, voodoo spells and an occasional childish display of pouring water on your opponent mark the history of the board. Members turned against the hand that appointed them and each other. Additional security was mandated at meetings as they turned into raucous events

A parade of school superintendents passed through the system often time absconding with a hefty paycheck while providing little or no substantive value. The few with a vision and possible solutions, while initially applauded, soon found themselves out of favor with some board members and placed on an ice flow which drifted out to sea.

A business management turn around team with no experience in running a school district, much less ever having turned one around, came riding into town proclaiming to be the cavalry to the rescue. As Custer was heard to have said at the Little Big Horn, “Just what I need. More Indians.” The team scalped the City with an enormous fee, alienated parents and students, closed schools , outsourced services, and eliminated positions. While they did an admirable job in some respects by eliminating waste in some areas, they never quite addressed the fundamental quality of education issues. Commissioner King has indicated that there are nationally tested reforms to turn around urban schools. Why didn’t the turn around team implement these turn around reforms?

Graduating students are frustrated and rightfully so as to what the loss of accreditation means to their educational futures. While they have been assured that the loss of accreditation will have no effect on college placement, maybe the students have become a little cynical after hearing the empty promises and rhetoric coming from the mouths of the powers that be.
I have one problem with the proposed takeover by the State. The new board will be comprised of Mayoral appointees. Didn’t he pick a slate of candidates years ago? Didn’t he appoint some board members?

Court challenges are inevitable. Now the lawyers can make some money.