Upon the eve of a new Fiscal Year and Congress’s adjournment, I’m struck this week by the vile and bitter sentiments filling the Halls of Congress and the citizenry at large. Of course, this is not really any different than life in these United States for the past few years.
OK, Congress just re-convened this week, but they will be adjourning seemingly as quickly – in about four (4) weeks. As I and a platoon of pundits have already proclaimed, a paucity – at best – of meaningful, significant legislation will be expected from this body before what promises to be an historic mid-term election on November 7th.
As for budgetary matters, I envision still another year of Continuing Resolutions (CRs) for federal employees. In addition to being downright silly and reprehensibly irresponsible, such delays are costly to our government because program enhancements are impossible, and the mere maintenance of operational continuity and effectiveness becomes a Herculean task.
I was in the government when the fiscal years ended on June 30th instead of the current September 30th cut-off. For years back then, Congress was unable to pass all appropriations bills timely. Recognizing its failings and the associated negative ramifications to government operations, Congress moved back the fiscal year to start three (3) months later, to October 1st, so that CRs would go the way of the do-do bird and become extinct! It would appear as though our lawmakers have let us down a bit.
It’s not just the sound and timely funding of our government that’s at risk. It’s the sound governing of our country. Now, political bitterness prevents people from listening to opposing views, synthesizing alternative approaches, and agreeing upon and implementing effective programs designed to serve the citizens.
It’s strangely difficult to think about today’s Executive Branch without also considering the impact of the political climate on it. Sure, political agendas have always driven government programs, but it seems that such matters haven’t been as prominent in the public’s consciousness at they are now in 2006.
From what I’ve read, especially in Charlie Peter’s fine book entitled, “Five Days in Philadelphia,” the country was rife with political wrangling in FDR’s administration, yet when the threat of Hitler appeared on the horizon, more reasoned heads on both sides of the aisle prevailed and pulled the country through the terrible challenge of a World War. Some think we are now fighting a world war without the capital letters.
[Actually, the Republican presidential candidate, Wendell Willkie, agreed to support, or at least not object to, FDR’s efforts to save Britain from Hitler and others.]
Such national bonding was evident immediately after the events of September 11, 2001, even with the painful experience of the 2000 presidential election still close in our political rearview mirror. Unfortunately, largely due to slower than desired or expected progress in Iraq, whatever national consensus existed on the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT) has virtually evaporated into nothingness and is but a distant memory.
Excuse my lamentation, however I believe this dynamic permeates our national psyche and prevents our Executive Branch from functioning as well as it should. I even attribute this sort of hostility to what I’ve perceived in my last few years in the federal government as an increase of back-biting, bizarre office politics, passive-aggressive behavior to subvert programs, etc. It’s as if anything goes, if one person decides for whatever reason that another person is not likeable, responsible, of a similar mindset, etc. Perhaps I’m stretching the point, yet such strange atmospherics seem present in so many offices today based on not only my experiences but those of fellow colleagues and friends who are still employed by the U.S. Government.
I’ll take two aspirins, and try to get a good sleep. When I awake, all will be back to normal. But there’s something about which I’m uncertain. How long do you suppose I’ll have to sleep before everything’s back to normal, or a reasonable facsimile thereof?
++++
Fred W. Apelquist, III, M.Ed.
Approximately 660 words.
© September, 2006