“The DNR is just a killing business,” a former member of the Dane County Conservation Congress told me in April 2005. “They want more customers because they are selling wildlife that is in the custody of all of us cheap to hunters.”
That night, an overflow room in the Alliant Energy Center overflowed. Mothers, children and college students filled the vast hall, clutching signs and photos of their favorite cats. The Department of Natural Resources even wired a series of speakers so those gathered outside the hearing room might hear the proceedings. Inside, dozens of Madisonians occupied every aisle and every corner. An insurmountable line had already formed in front of the microphones where citizens would be allowed to testify before the committee. Each speaker seemed to have the same intention, and the chorus was finally broken by a delegate who said through a chorus of boos, “We’ve established the emotions people feel for their pets, if we could move on…”
Dane County was passionate about keeping cat hunting illegal. But to other areas of the state, the feral cats were a menace, especially in La Crosse, where “Question 62” originated. The plan failed miserably in Madison, but passed 6,830 to 5,201 in the state at large. More than anything, the hearing offered dramatic confirmation that any branch of government can find itself in the midst of a political storm.
In that vein, the state Senate passed a bill Tuesday that would remove the governor’s authority to appoint the DNR secretary, leaving that task to the 7-member Natural Resource Board. When controversy befalls elements of state and national government that are unaccustomed to media scrutiny, truth is often pawned in favor of deception and evasion. While civil servants can fall victim to these temptations, a political appointee has a greater interest in hiding truth or acting unethically. Appointees often struggle with the conflict of interest between public service and service to a politician who is directly responsible for their performance. That conflict often leads to opportunism, as officials take advantage of populist passions to make a popular political point.
Depoliticizing positions like DNR secretary would certainly improve the efficiency of public office because the predominant factor in nominating citizens to these posts would be talent. Under the current system, the field is often whittled in half due to ideological concerns.
The premise former Gov. Tommy Thompson used to turn the DNR secretary into a political appointment in 1995 is understandable. Having elected officials responsible for the performance of civil servants could theoretically increase oversight and accountability for the performance of a department. That hasn’t worked in practice. Instead, sniveling careerists scour the depths of conscience to justify mindless subservience to a political interest. As a result, the people’s work is conducted in a horrifically wasteful, unfair and inefficient manner. Meanwhile, special interests grow larger and bolder, confident in their influence on the political process. Needless to say, this is not the way to run a sound government.
Nonetheless, this dilemma plagues government at all levels. Who can forget Florida in 2000, when Katherine Harris, a Bush campaign employee, was tasked with legally certifying the election results as secretary of state? The same attitude dominated FEMA during Hurricane Katrina and apparently still pervades the organization. Indeed, FEMA’s fake press conference about the California wildfires is a prime example of what happens when officials tasked with executing basic governmental functions are preoccupied with political posturing.
It’s no surprise this attitude trickles down to government agencies, when we consider the politicians themselves. The tendency of political officials to pander without supporting a real agenda was put on full display in Tuesday’s Democratic debate, as frontrunner Hillary Clinton somehow supported New York Gov. Elliot Spitzer’s plan to let illegal immigrants have driver’s licenses without endorsing it.
It seems the GOP has finally realized their party has devolved almost entirely into this tactic. Party leaders make twopence gestures to religious conservatives (see Terry Shiavo), while failing to deliver on their core issues. Meanwhile, President Bush has gotten off to a late start pandering to economic conservatives by suddenly decrying bloated legislation chockfull of pork and other assorted government waste in the twilight of an administration defined by deficits. We may be stuck with this kind of two-faced pandering on a national and state level for the foreseeable future, but the state Senate has taken a step toward ensuring this won’t be the future of our government at every level.
The point is, politics is politics, but we can’t let these attitudes seep into basic public offices. Restoring public faith in the capacity of government to perform competently will take more than depoliticizing a DNR secretary, but even the largest rock was cast from a single grain.
Bassey Etim ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in political science and journalism.
