3 ms·
It seems pretty unlikely to me that 18F would routinely be called upon to implement a specifically Trumpian agenda. From the little I know of what they do, it's
by phlakaton 9y ago
It seems pretty unlikely to me that 18F would routinely be called upon to implement a specifically Trumpian agenda. From the little I know of what they do, it's about making government effective in service to the American people. That should be a politically neutral goal.
To the extent that even Trump's administration is focused on that, I can support it. However, the evidence I've seen so far strongly suggests to me that it's not.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> It seems pretty unlikely to me that 18F would routinely be called upon to implement a specifically Trumpian agenda. From the little I know of what they do, it's about making government effective in service to the American people. That should be a politically neutral goal. In government, “in service to the American people" in the mission of an agency means, in practice, “in service to the priorities of the current political leadership”. Notionally, democratic accountability should make the latter approximate the former, but in practice results are quite mixed.
- phlakaton 9y agoLet me put it this way: is getting veterans prompter, better access to VA health care a Democratic issue or a Republican issue? Hopefully you'll agree it's both (or neither). Now you could look at improvements we might make to the VA at this time and oppose them, saying that any improvements we make to the government during a Trump administration legitimizes his administration and priorities. As for me, I've had enough of that. It's the "party of 'no'" all over again. If you think the 18F is doing something specifically nefarious, name it. Otherwise, if something is a benefit to the American people, I support 18F, the Digital Service, or whoever taking it on--and I suspect that most of their work falls into this relatively uncontroversial category.
- gowld 9y agoIt's nigh impossible for a political leader to make an effort to "make government effective" only for operations with bipartisan/mltipartisan support. Why would a leader intentionally subvert their own power?