Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

All we are saying is give hacks a chance

By ROBERT FRIEDMAN
Published October 16, 2005

Every presidential administration finds spots for hacks and hangers-on. Republican presidents used to salt theirs away in the Department of Housing and Urban Development because, well, they didn't care very much about housing and urban development. Democrats and Republicans alike have put hacks in the Commerce Department, because one man's hack is another man's shrewd insider, and connections are the very lifeblood of that dubious department.

Back when I was an impressionable lad, I couldn't help but notice that almost every Georgian with a college degree and a relatively clean criminal record wound up as deputy undersecretary of something or other after Jimmy Carter was elected president. During the 1976 campaign, the primary responsibility of an aide named Greg Schneiders was to carry Carter's coat when the candidate would roll up his shirtsleeves and wade into a crowd. Schneiders was the "Altoid Boy" of his day. But then he became deputy to the assistant to the president for communications. And that experience allowed him to establish himself as an "international consultant" who specializes in "branding, corporate responsibility and public affairs."

Anyway, President Bush didn't invent the hackocracy, but - because he and his family famously prize loyalty over all other attributes, including competence and integrity - he has been more aggressive than most of his predecessors in placing hacks in positions where they could do real harm: overseeing FEMA, prosecuting the war in Iraq, that kind of thing.

The nomination of the extremely loyal Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court may prove to be the hack that broke the camel's back, even for many of the president's strongest supporters. I'd have thought the Brownie embarrassment would force the White House to declare a moratorium on blatant hackery for at least a few months. And I expected a nominee who wouldn't look quite so laughable alongside John Roberts, who showed himself to be smarter and more likable than any of the senators who tried to grill him during his confirmation hearings.

Miers hasn't been helped by the faint praise of the people who are supposed to be defending her. Former U.S. Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., who was chosen by the White House to lead Miers through the confirmation process, suggests that she could bring balance to a court that already has too many smart people and legal scholars: "If great intellectual powerhouse is a qualification to be a member of the court and represent the American people ... and to interpret the Constitution, then I think we have a court so skewed on the intellectual side that we may not be getting representation of America as a whole."

Coats' lame attempt to prop up Miers recalled the famous words of former U.S. Sen. Roman Hruska, the Nebraska Republican who unintentionally sealed the fate of failed Nixon Supreme Court nominee Harold Carswell: "Even if he is mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they, and a little chance?"

Robert Friedman can be reached at friedman@sptimes.com

[Last modified October 14, 2005, 18:22:03]