US Politics: Competence Crisis?

[Guest Raidne]

The subtitle is for an article in The Atlantic that I will link as soon as I'm able about the Obama administration, but the applicability of the critique is really up for grabs considering the all too real appointment crisis and across the board funding issues.

On the one hand, a person could justifiably say that the administrative state lacks leadership and the administration has gotten comfortable spinning the news cycle instead of solving the problem. On the other hand, what the hell are they supposed to do with an executive branch run by career bureaucrats?

Government employees don't get fired, meaning a fair number of "executives in charge" and "acting" agency heads are the leftover right hands of some Bush appointee.

As far as I can tell, this doesn't lead to outright partisan behavior, but there are real policy differences that do throw a wrench in the works. It's the opposite problem from the overly-loyalty-driven White House yes men. And maybe why that problem exists?

Here is the opinion piece I mentioned - it's short: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/obamas-crisis-of-competence/277504/

[sologdin]

solution is to elect all petty prom king bureaucrats, raids.

This is so obviously unconstitutional for so many reasons. Is it possible to sue people for passing obviously unconstitutional laws?

i'm fairly certain that there's absolute immunity for legislators in civil rights cases. but yeah, a section 1983 action would be the obvious solution otherwise--so obvious that every statute would generate a class action.

i think that the statute will be torn up in a kennedy opinion (unless roberts writes it), citing lawrence v. texas. thomas will dissent, but will cite himself citing griswold about the statute being uncommonly silly, but beyond his power becuz stat0rz ritez!!! other two will dissent with their normal casual malevolence.

[Guest Raidne]

I read that Thomas cited Korematsu in one of his opinions this term. Cue Scot.

[Tempra]

I read that Thomas cited Korematsu in one of his opinions this term. Cue Scot.

He did it in his Fisher concurrence:

The Court first articulated the strict-scrutiny standard in Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944). There, we held that “[p]ressing public necessity may some- times justify the existence of [racial discrimination]; racial antagonism never can.” Id., at 216.1 Aside from Grutter, the Court has recognized only two instances in which a “[p]ressing public necessity” may justify racial discrimina- tion by the government. First, in Korematsu, the Court recognized that protecting national security may satisfy this exacting standard. In that case, the Court upheld an evacuation order directed at “all persons of Japanese ancestry” on the grounds that the Nation was at war with Japan and that the order had “a definite and close rela-tionship to the prevention of espionage and sabotage.” 323 U. S., at 217–218. Second, the Court has recognized that the government has a compelling interest in remedying past discrimination for which it is responsible, but we have stressed that a government wishing to use race must provide “a ‘strong basis in evidence for its conclusion that remedial action [is] necessary.’” Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U. S. 469, 500, 504 (1989) (quoting Wygant v. Jackson Bd. of Ed., 476 U. S. 267, 277 (1986) (plurality opinion)).

[Inigima]

Those of you who think the US government is a bunch of dumbfucks who can't do anything right and waste all your money have some new ammunition:

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/07/us-agency-baffled-by-modern-technology-destroys-mice-to-get-rid-of-viruses/

Edit: this one isn't the government's fault but is still pretty funny

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/07/we-interrupt-this-program-to-warn-the-emergency-alert-system-is-hackable/

[Kouran]

Ini thats priceless. Though it's not that surprising. People react in weird ways to computer viruses. For example my current work site has a virus in the Exchange system right now, but they refuse to take the system offline so it can be cleaned thoroughly. So instead we are spamming out hundreds of thousands of emails and getting black listed. /boogle

[RWHamel]

Those of you who think the US government is a bunch of dumbfucks who can't do anything right and waste all your money have some new ammunition:

http://arstechnica.c...rid-of-viruses/

Edit: this one isn't the government's fault but is still pretty funny

http://arstechnica.c...em-is-hackable/

EDA (Economic Development Agency). No wonder our economy is in the crapper.

[Shryke]

Those of you who think the US government is a bunch of dumbfucks who can't do anything right and waste all your money have some new ammunition:

http://arstechnica.c...rid-of-viruses/

Eh. Not like private companies are any smarter on the average.

[Inigima]

Ini thats priceless. Though it's not that surprising. People react in weird ways to computer viruses. For example my current work site has a virus in the Exchange system right now, but they refuse to take the system offline so it can be cleaned thoroughly. So instead we are spamming out hundreds of thousands of emails and getting black listed. /boogle

If only they'd taken a hammer to it from the beginning!

And yeah people are dumb as hell about this stuff. YOU CAN'T TAKE EXCHANGE OFFLINE I NEED MY EMAIL. Uh, okay, have fun when you can't email people anymore, and you have to take it offline anyway for longer than you would have if you'd just done it, and you still have the blacklisting to deal with.

[Guest Raidne]

Eh. Not like private companies are any smarter on the average.

Here, I would disagree. I think that might be the case if the federal government actually had some sort of centralized department or agency that managed all technology issues and oversaw all on site staff, but each agency tends to have its own office, with interference from GAO, GSA, and OMB. I think OMB's e-gov might be the closest thing, but it seems to only deal with internet interaction with the public, and not lifecycle management or system-wide upgrades, etc.

I would very, very, very much like to give specific examples, but I don't think that's wise.

[Guest Raidne]

Actually, I have a question for our resident IT people: how disruptive is a java update supposed to be, really?

[Shryke]

Here, I would disagree. I think that might be the case if the federal government actually had some sort of centralized department or agency that managed all technology issues and oversaw all on site staff, but each agency tends to have its own office, with interference from GAO, GSA, and OMB. I think OMB's e-gov might be the closest thing, but it seems to only deal with internet interaction with the public, and not lifecycle management or system-wide upgrades, etc.

I would very, very, very much like to give specific examples, but I don't think that's wise.

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with or how here. The decentralization of government IT would seem to make it look MORE like a collection of private companies or what have you.

And any IT professional has stories about dealing with morons, both at the individual and the company level.

[Altherion]

Actually, I have a question for our resident IT people: how disruptive is a java update supposed to be, really?

In theory, most Java updates are supposed to be nearly transparent (famous last words...). In practice, I have seen them break things pretty badly and in a way that is not trivial to fix.

[Kouran]

Actually, I have a question for our resident IT people: how disruptive is a java update supposed to be, really?

Typically no issue, unless you dont uninstall the older versions of Java at the same time. Old versions of Java still have their security vulnerabilities, and can compromise your system even when they shouldnt be used.

[Inigima]

Typically no issue, unless you dont uninstall the older versions of Java at the same time. Old versions of Java still have their security vulnerabilities, and can compromise your system even when they shouldnt be used.

Occasionally shitty developers rely on particular versions of Java, such that updating Java can cause applications to break. It's rare since most syntax doesn't change much, but it happens. I wish I did not have firsthand experience with this phenomenon.

[Shryke]

Occasionally shitty developers rely on particular versions of Java, such that updating Java can cause applications to break. It's rare since most syntax doesn't change much, but it happens. I wish I did not have firsthand experience with this phenomenon.

/hug

[Guest Raidne]

Occasionally shitty developers....

Interesting. What if you chose not to renew your service contract with the developer? Would that have any impact on the situation?

[Kouran]

Interesting. What if you chose not to renew your service contract with the developer? Would that have any impact on the situation?

Oh it would impact it alright when your shit didnt work anymore after Java was updated.

[TerraPrime]

Saw an interview on PBS with a congress Representative from South Carolina (R.) on immigration reform, and I found myself agreeing with the GOP position on the issue of path to citizenship. They're still wrong on border security, but I agree with their point on the negative points of granting the same path to citizenship to all the current illegal residents. I wonder if the Democrat will be able to back down on that issue?

[Guest]

Saw an interview on PBS with a congress Representative from South Carolina (R.) on immigration reform, and I found myself agreeing with the GOP position on the issue of path to citizenship. They're still wrong on border security, but I agree with their point on the negative points of granting the same path to citizenship to all the current illegal residents. I wonder if the Democrat will be able to back down on that issue?

Here, again, I am embarrassingly uninformed on a major issue. I swear I have seen next to nothing really breaking down what the path to citizenship proposals on the table even are beyond just figuring that they exist. Does anyone have a good guide?