The Washington Post has two stories on its front page that relate, in a way. One is the second in its series on the DC school system. Today's is a review of the various efforts to reform the system over the years. Every few years new people come to power promising change and improvement, only to leave sometime later, either slinking out the door tired and defeated or thrown out by a new set of reformers. A theme is the power of the bureaucracy to frustrate change even at the cost of protecting incompetence. Another theme is unanticipated consequences--a court suit ends up depriving the system of money by forcing it to spend $50,000 per special ed student (if my quick math is right--$120 million divided by 2400 students?)
The other story is on the use of political connections to select immigration judges. It seems the Bush administration has been appointing judges with such ties.
What's the relationship? New leadership can exert its influence by appointing its people, as in the case of Bush and immigration judges. When it can't exert influence, as in the case of the DC schools, it can't be held responsible. So, bottom line, there's a case to be made for the old Jacksonian spoils system and against the goo-goo Progressive governmental reform people.
No comments:
Post a Comment