Ethics

This issue continues to be politicized, although it should not be.  Both Republican and Democratic administrations have had troubles in this area.  Political commentators from both parties prefer to attack each other rather than think seriously about whether the law allows too much partisan activity by White House staff.  In my view it does.

My op-ed in today's New York Times is here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/opinion/14painter.html

A collection of op-eds in the Washington Post is here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060404071.html

As I have repeatedly said on these pages, nothing the Administration did appears to be illegal.  It just looks bad.  It has also happened in other Administrations, a lot.  This is President Obama's problem now, but it was President Bush's problem before that and President Clinton?s problem before that.  I argued in Chapter 10 of my book on government ethics -- which went to press before the 2008 election -- that the White House Office of Political Affairs should be shut down. 

One observation perhaps worth making is that in most prior administrations the Chief of Staff did not direct partisan activity (although he did sometimes participate in partisan activity).  When White House lawyers objected to a scheme conceived in the political office, the disagreement could be brought to the Chief of Staff who could say ?no? to the political people.  The White House loses this balance of perspectives if the Chief of Staff and his deputies are themselves involved in directing political activity. 

Once again this is not about President Obama?s record for ethics ?? it is about a system that he inherited from his predecessors that is not working.   The Hatch Act amendments I suggest in my op-ed are one approach.  Commentators here may wish to suggest other approaches.