12 ms·
A strong president could probably do something here. I think the original intent of the law was that they'd issue guidelines for airports to follow, rather than
by MichaelBurge 10y ago
A strong president could probably do something here. I think the original intent of the law was that they'd issue guidelines for airports to follow, rather than do the inspections themselves. So a president might be able to fire everyone and replace them with a tiny agency that occasionally sends inspectors to Boeing to check that the windows and frame are bulletproof and that the cockpit is reinforced.
- Aelinsaar 10y agoIt's not Trump's guts that anyone is worried about, it's his narcissistic, babbling, bigoted brains.
- pessimizer 10y agoI'm pretty sure that Trump is going to be pro expanding anything that involves subcontractors, especially construction subcontractors. A vote for Trump is a vote for Berlusconi.
- darawk 10y agoYa unfortunately 'strong' presidents also tend to be authoritarian, and love things like the TSA.
- greedo 10y agoSo basically the last two Presidents?
- jessaustin 10y agoISTM this comment originally had something about Trump? Anyway it isn't clear to me that even an imperial president unilaterally could fire most of the personnel in any agency, even one as useless as TSA or CIA.
- MichaelBurge 10y agoThat used to be exactly the case. They changed the laws since then since each president would fire everyone and replace them with his own people. Now you have to be hired for merit and can't be fired for political affiliation. This is the "Civil Service". Restructuring an agency(and removing the positions) is different from replacing people, though. I'm sure there's something that could be done.
- jessaustin 10y agoSure that's what they tell us. In fact the spoils system served an important purpose: it limited the size of the executive branch, since you can only hire so many people at once. So much for that.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]