![]() Part two will discuss presidents’ first attempts to staff the White House from 1981 through 2001 and demonstrates key demographic characteristics and concludes with an evaluative discussion of the Bush operation.Īlthough President Bush’s staff possessed qualities similar to those of his predecessors, he imposed his own ideas about running a White House by making structural changes within the EOP, reflecting his administration’s priorities, goals, and general approach to governing. This article identifies the unique features of President Bush’s staffing organization as well as recent additions. Bush and Ronald Reagan into the comparison provides a long-term look at presidents’ initial staffing, revealing additional similarities as well as important differences. However, staff biographies published in the National Journal reveal remarkable similarity between the two administrations. Furthermore, while Clinton worked hard to assemble a team that “looked like America,” Bush hired establishment Republicans, particularly those with a conservative bent. The conventional wisdom was that President Bush hired an older, wiser set of advisers than President Clinton, who had rewarded “the kids”-hard-working, youthful campaign staffers (Stephanopoulos 1999, 148 Houston 1993, 22). More specifically, we examine appointments to the Executive Office of the President (EOP), including such senior staff members as the national security adviser and the director of the Office of Management and Budget. In an effort to gain perspective on the Bush record, we compare his staff to the initial staffs of his three immediate predecessors-Bill Clinton, George H.W. ![]() ![]() This article examines Bush’s first crack at assembling his White House and assesses its early performance as well as the staff and structural changes made in the wake of the terrorist attacks. While these were Bush’s initial goals, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, required instant adjustments that resulted in structural, procedural, and staff changes. Selecting an ideal White House staff is confounded by a host of factors: satisfying the president-elect’s personal preferences, honoring political obligations, finding experts with the appropriate ideological hue, and achieving diversity goals. Bush’s immediate hiring decisions was the choice of senior White House staff, those advisers with whom he would have the most day-to-day contact. When the disputed election of 2000 ended with the Supreme Court’s decision on December 12, it effectively shortened the presidential transition to less than fifty days and complicated the incoming administration’s personnel problems.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |