Gore Report Targets 252,000 Federal Jobs
By: Stephen Barr (The Washington Post)
It's deja vu all over again. We were required to terminate employment of term, temporary, and probationary employees. We were subjected to passive/aggressive encouragement to take the buyout. We were expected to do more work with fewer people. The National Partnership for Reinventing Government focuses a lot of attention on government procurement. We were required to contract services we had provided ourselves. And we were required to utilize preferred contractors that ended up costing more to deliver the same service.
That's what Al Gore and his private sector advisors really did. Don't sweep Al Gore's legacy under the rug to complain about what Elon Musk is doing. Al Gore provided the model that Musk is following.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
September 4, 1993 -- The Clinton administration's plan to make the government work better and cost less would over the next five years more than double the cut in federal jobs already authorized and save an estimated $108 billion by reducing waste, eliminating unneeded bureaucracy and improving services to taxpayers, sources said yesterday.
The proposed reduction in the federal work force, from 100,000 jobs ordered earlier this year by President Clinton to 252,000 positions, would reduce the Civil Service by 12 percent, bringing it below the 2 million mark for the first time since 1966, the sources said.
The information available yesterday did not detail the full $108 billion in estimated savings. But among the items cited were a proposed savings of $22 billion by changing the way the government purchases supplies and services, $5.4 billion by modernizing government computer and information systems and $3.3 billion by simplifying paperwork and other overhead costs in grant programs to state and local governments.
Excerpts from the "reinventing government" report, scheduled for release at the White House on Tuesday, show that the administration intends to dump regulations that affect virtually every corner of the bureaucracy and carve deeply into headquarters staff, supervisors, budget analysts, accountants and procurement and personnel specialists.
The recommendations, made by the administration's National Performance Review, led by Vice President Gore, come at a time when the president and congressional leaders are under pressure from conservative Democrats and independent activist Ross Perot for cuts in spending and entitlements.
The excerpts from the Gore report did not make clear how much money would be saved by the proposed work force reduction or how many of the 365,000 federal workers who live in the Washington area might be affected.
Shortly after taking office, Clinton issued an executive order paring federal jobs by 100,000, a cutback aides said would be accomplished through attrition. He lost out on a separate proposal to freeze federal pay during the summer budget negotiations, but aides said the White House would seek to reduce increases in federal pay through appropriations legislation later this year.
Because the administration likely would have trouble meeting its expanded personnel cut through attrition alone, the Gore report recommends asking Congress to offer early retirement and cash incentives -- popularly known as "buyouts" -- to "ease the transition for workers."
If a worker finds his or her job eliminated and is unable to take advantage of a buyout, the Gore report says, "we will help that employee find another job offer, either with government or in the private sector."
More than two-thirds of the recommendations in the Gore report could be accomplished through presidential directives or executive orders, the sources said. But any fundamental restructuring of the budgetary, personnel and procurement systems would require the approval of Congress, which is traditionally reluctant to give up its oversight and control of departments and agencies.
In an interview Friday, the vice president said he understood "there will be resistance and opposition to many of the changes we're recommending." But, Gore said, "when the president of the United States and the entire Cabinet are committed whole hog to the changes embodied in the report, then our ability as an administration to implement these changes should not be underestimated.
"The president fully intends to play the whole keyboard in bringing these changes about. And he has an extensive keyboard to play."
Gore added later, "We can reinvent government to make it work better and cost less, or we can continue on the present course and make it cost less and work worse."
The administration's "reinvent government" initiative began in March, when Clinton named Gore to head the effort. About 200 federal workers were recruited to staff the review and produce recommendations in six months for cutting costs and improving services and program effectiveness.
The Gore review has been based on two models: a cost-cutting effort in Texas led by state Comptroller John Sharp, and the national bestseller, "Reinventing Government," written by journalist David Osborne and former city manager Ted Gaebler. Sharp and Osborne have served as consultants to the Gore team.
The Texas Performance Review saved the state more than $4 billion by eliminating or consolidating services and programs and by what critics have called the juggling of funds or delaying of payments.
The Osborne book, which has been praised by Clinton, argues that the "entrepreneurial spirit" of the private sector must be instilled in government by decentralizing controls, "empowering" front-line workers to make decisions and treating taxpayers as customers.
Proposals included in the excerpts from the Gore report would streamline the government's systems for:
Budgets. Lengthening the federal budget cycle from one year to two would give the administration and Congress time to truly debate the nation's priorities, the report says.
"We do not know what last year's money, or that of the year before, actually accomplished. Agency officials devise their funding requests based on what they got before, not whether it produced results," the report says.
Personnel. The Office of Personnel Management should phase out the 10,000-page Federal Personnel Manual and all agency implementing directives, the report says. In 1991, the report notes, the Navy's Human Resources Office processed enough forms "to create a 'monument' 3,100 feet tall -- six times the height of the Washington Monument."
Procurement. The administration should rewrite the 1,600-page Federal Acquisition Regulation, the 2,900 pages of agency supplements that accompany it and the executive order that governs federal purchases, the report says.
Regulations. Clinton should issue a directive requiring all agencies to review internal government regulations over the next three years with a goal of eliminating 50 percent of them, the report says.
"The systems have to change," Gore said in the interview. "The pattern by which the federal government presently operates has to completely change. We have good people trapped in bad systems. And in order to change the systems and the pattern of operation -- the culture of government, if you will -- we have to change a number of things simultaneously."
Gore, who studied "high-performing" corporations and other private sector models as part of the performance review, said "the federal government is badly failing." If the government "faced competition from some other entity of equal size and scope, this one would quickly go bankrupt and would be obsolete in short order," he added.
Two congressional committee chairmen who handle government organizational matters said they welcome the Gore report.
Sen. John Glenn (D-Ohio), chairman of the Governmental Affairs panel, said "there is a mood to move ahead." Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), chairman of the Government Operations panel, said Gore's "personal commitment to this means that real action on this enormous task is likely."
Glenn suggested the administration should consider as its first step using pilot programs or agency projects to demonstrate "practical improvements" spawned by the Gore report. "I want to see this stuff hammered out so that we really bring some changes and efficiencies into the government," Glenn said.
Conyers suggested that "the budget numbers and substantive details may need some more development," but called the report "a marker for action."
Clinton and Gore are not the first "to undertake this task and many of the ideas coming forward are not new," said John D. Macomber, chairman of the Council for Excellence in Government, a nonpartisan group of 800 former senior government managers.
But, Macomber said, "we should resist the urge to pick apart the details." The debate, he said, should be over the larger issues of institutional leadership, agency missions "and delivering results."
Tags
Who is online
62 visitors
Blue washing won't hide that the fact that Al Gore's pot was just as black as Elon Musk's kettle.
An inconvenient truth is that Gore's and Musk's work is alike
And yet; here we are again. Why is that? Can it be that the federal system (despite cuts in staffing) seeks its 'happy median'? That is, that the staffing in the federal system (to cover 350 plus millions) is essential ?
Also, if there are not enough jobs in the public sector to cover those in it as it stands:
Jobs report shows a hiring slowdown as companies are acting like ‘they’re in a recession’
By Alicia Wallace , CNN
Updated 1:30 PM EST, Fri February 7, 2025
The US economy kicked off 2025 by adding 143,000 jobs in January, fewer than expected; but the unemployment rate dipped to 4%, according to data released Friday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Economists were projecting the unemployment rate would stay at 4.1 % and 170,000 jobs would be added, according to FactSet estimates.
Friday’s report — which also featured some significant data adjustments that happen at the start of every year — also provided more clarity on recent labor market trends, indicating that job growth last year was weaker than previously estimated.
The latest benchmark revision — an annual process that squares up estimates — showed there were 589,000 fewer jobs added to the economy in 2024 (more on that below).
Then, it is wishful thinking (or out-right lying) to suggest that people put out of work in the federal system will find work in the private sector. Go figure.
So Brandon's recession finally hit.
Or have you not noticed the last several jobs reports the Brandon's administration "overstated" the growth; and then downsized it months later.
Brandon owns any recession that occurs- Democrats spent tax payer dollars and increased inflation.
The funny part is leftists think this wouldn't exist if Kamala had won.
We would be much worse off- because Kamala and Democrats are too fucking clueless to stop doing the same damn things that caused it in the first place.
It's coming, I can't understand why so many people refuse to acknowledge the issue and continue to fight to maintain the status quo. The federal government has been throwing money around for several years now and the continued allegiance to party over sanity continues.
This need for whataboutism in harkening back to the Clinton administration is tired, but it’s also just a terrible analogy. Every headline in this desperate series of seeds makes the point that what Trump and Musk are doing is unprecedented. Today’s effort:
Two words in and it’s already different in the most important way. Report. He published a report. He didn’t fire thousands of people on his own authority, indiscriminately. He issued a report.
Then the next word: Targets. The deed has not been done. Recommendations are being offered. Shoot the target - or don’t. These targets or recommendations went to the president, who submitted them to Congress. Many recommendations made it into law, but several did not.
Other than a perfectly valid and generalized desire to cut the fat from government, there is nothing similar between what happened 30 years ago and what is happening today. Stop trying to excuse what is going on right now by equating it to a totally different set of circumstances.
This sentence was also conveniently ignored:
Or not. At the time Gore concluded the six month National Performance Review, he hadn't figured out what he could do without Congress. Basically Gore discovered that the only thing he really needed Congressional approval for was eliminating agencies. He could eliminate programs and offices without Congressional involvement. Gore figured out that any Congressional authorization could be fulfilled using private contractors; the Congressional authorizations and appropriations didn't mandate using Federal workers.
That's where the public/private partnership BS came from. By running Congressionally authorized programs using contractors, eliminating the program only required cancelling the contract by citing any number of performance issues. Gore deliberately used procurement to bypass Congress and eliminate Federal jobs.
You're still trying to equate two things which are not equivalent, Nerm.
Neither has Musk. The difference is, he's gone and done it, anyway.
Why are they not equivalent? Based on my real-world experience, Gore's efficiency measures were very similar to Musk's efficiency measures. Musk appears to be following Gore's playbook.
Al Gore set the precedent and laid out how to shrink the size of the Federal workforce and change the priorities for bureaucratic functions. Musk is only following in Al Gore's footsteps.
Gore didn't wait for Congress to order the firing of term, temporary, and probationary employees. Gore didn't wait for Congress to approve shifting performance of authorized programs to private contractors. Gore shifting program functions to contractors has made it easier for Musk. Executive agencies are responsible for contract oversight and can terminate contracts without Congressional approval.
Tell us what Musk's efficiency measures are.
Do you think Congress rescinded any of the authority that was given to Al Gore?
Musk's efficiency measures?
You can compare the two here:
In the words of President Clinton: "Our goal is to make the entire federal government both less expensive and more efficient, and to change the culture of our national bureaucracy away from complacency and entitlement toward initiative and empowerment."
I haven't found a direct statement by Donald Trump concerning DOGE. But Trump's campaign promises were consistent with Clinton's goals for the NPR or REGO.
The goals of both the NPR and DOGE were/are to cut waste, cut regulatory overburden, improve efficiency, and make government more responsive to constituents. Both the NPR and DOGE were/are pursuing those goals by shrinking the Federal workforce, reviewing expenditures, requiring adjustments to regulations, placing holds on spending pending review, and other measures to many to list.
Both Al Gore and Elon Musk were/are being guided by management practices of private sector business. Both Al Gore were/are advocating application of technology to achieve goals. Both Al Gore and Elon Musk were/are gaming the procurement system to pursue goals.
Al Gore and Elon Musk are more alike than different.
You aren't answering the question, Nerm. Not surprising.
I didn't ask what the goals were. I asked what his efficiency measures were.
But, since you provided the link, how successful do you think Musk will be with those goals when his team consists of people like this:
Did Gore's team post classified information on the internet?
Did they fire a bunch of employees responsible for oversight of nuclear weapons?
That's a bald-faced lie. I answered your question here:
That's not a measure of efficiency, Nerm.
It is a tactic used by MAGA and conservative thinktanks to try reverse critical analysis when formulating their activities and actions. That is, it is a 'step' in the process to look back into the record of proceedings, find a 'case' which is similar or 'suspect' and then PROCEED to ASSENT to MAGNIFICATION of the activity for MAGA purposes. The genius, if it can be called that, is it silences the shallow (an lazy) critics whom can not discern or articulate fine distinctions between right and wrong. Additionally, this practice, gives 'fuel' to fellow MAGAs who want to feel that they are not breaking 'bad' - it allows them false comfort for their misdeeds and bad faith actions.
Citing precedent is now whataboutism? Clinton issued the order for a National Performance Review in March, 1993. Gore had finished the review six months later, in September, 1993. Elon Musk doesn't need six months since Al Gore laid out the methodology.
Gore's report lays out what can be done without Congress. That's why the National Performance Review which morphed into the National Partnership for Reinventing Government are precedents. The Trump administration doesn't need to reinvent the wheel; they have Gore's precedent to follow.
Al Gore (in partnership with Newt Gingrich) ultimately eliminated 350,000 to 400,000 jobs. Eliminating those jobs began as soon as the report was issued and Clinton approved. The first round was elimination of term, temporary, probationary, and special appointment employees. (I know because I received orders to fire mine.) The buyouts began soon after. (I know because I received orders to encourage my employees to take the buyout.)
Don't lecture me on what Al Gore and Newt Gingrich did. I was there. I know what I was ordered to do. And I was a casualty of Clinton's desire to score political points and hand out goodies to his buddies in the financial sector. Yes, Gore's efforts took more time but remember that we did not have email or an integrated digital infrastructure in 1993; the technology Musk is using didn't exist for Gore.
Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich's Republican Revolution are directly responsible for the decline of the United States. They put the country on an unsustainable path. Those are the unvarnished real world facts.
Fuck all neoliberals. And fuck all those who defend neoliberalism. I want everyone to experience what was done to me. I want everyone to lose their careers, their homes, their families, their universe. I want everyone to experience the joy of being rejected for any job because they were a damned gubmit worker. Retribution? Revenge? You can bet your neoliberal ass on that. I fervently hope Trump burns it all down. Savor the moment.
It is when there are so many crucial differences. You can’t say Musk is ok because Gore was ok. The process has been entirely different. If it were one or two minor, irrelevant differences, we could acknowledge and then dismiss those differences. But here, the very things people are complaining about with Musk are the important differences.
Great example of an important difference. There was a review that took six months. It took time and was thoughtful. Musk’s process has been “shoot first, aim later.” One consequence of this bull-in-a-china shop approach has been that people charged with monitoring our nuclear stockpiles were fired. Now, the government is trying to rehire them, but doesn’t even know how to contact them to come back to work.
I’m sorry you went through the problems you had, but even if you could say it was improperly or unwisely handled, that wouldn’t excuse Musk. And to characterize them as the same is just factually wrong.
I don’t know why you imagine any of that has anything to do with me. You obviously have some emotion about this, but it is inappropriate to direct it at me.
Yes, the MAGA is pissing on your leg and telling you it is raining.
The differences between Gore and Musk are as great as those between a skilled surgeon with a precision scalpel and a totally inexperienced headsman executioner with a dullass battle axe...
Al Gore's actions happened during Clinton's first term. Elon Musk is taking action during Trump's second term. Just because everyone wants to ignore the fact that DOGE is an extension of Trump's first term doesn't make it so.
Neoliberals defend the National Partnership to Reinvent Government, spread misinformation about the effects of the NPR, and give Bill Clinton and Al Gore a pass.
Absolutely false, as detailed in Tacos! 4
Gore was elected as VP. Musk is not.
Americans did not elect Musk. Americans DESERVED to hear what Musk's policies were.
Trump absolutely should have been telling Americans about these actions we are seeing.
Trump should have put before the Congress and Senate, our elected representatives, the due process of proper transparent appointments and appropriations involving a new agency that is NOT an actual look legal agency.
Trump can't just "say it" and ignore Congress, the Senate, the voters, and the law.
Unless MAGA is fine living in his "kingdom" with arbitrary edicts they have no say in.