Serving at the pleasure

10/11/08

Governor and vice presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, is apparently on the hot seat for using one of her tools in the office of governor to fire someone she doesn't trust, someone who apparently didn't see one of Alaska's employees as a problem, the way Governor Palin did.

There are a set of administrative rules that every official has to follow, no matter which political party you belong to; they are rules for every employee to follow while on the job (I think, although I have no proof to this effect, that "while on the job" means 24x7, whether one is in the office at their desk, or out in the evening with their family). There's also a decorum, a way to act, to behave, any time, anywhere, that is expected of any employee, which demonstrates character and, I suppose, trustworthiness.

One should be aware that there's nothing secure about holding a government job. There's a loophole in one's job security when you work in government and you're not the one who was elected. Just because you did a good job, maybe even a great job, under the last administration that doesn't mean you're automatically safely employed in your position under the new administration. Why? Because you are serving the governor, the mayor, the president at THEIR pleasure, at their convenience, at their discretion. Makes one wonder if it's worth taking a job in government, doesn't it?

Fortunately, there are people who are willing to make the sacrifice, risk their job security to do just that, to work in a probably highly-politicized atmosphere day-after-day and there's no guarantee that you'll be there in two years or four years.

So, how come this Administrative policy that so many people understand and take for granted, serving at the pleasure of So-and-So - the current administration - is printed in invisible ink? Why are the rules practiced under one administration not valid under the next administration? Because these politicos count on us, the Public, not knowing, not caring about these rules. They count on our ignorance, our sense of fair play, our belief that life should be packed with guarantees.

The most recent administrative rule scream fest was over some lawyers (eight of them, I think) who were fired when President Bush began his term as U.S. president. The opposition party screamed "foul!" although that same opposition party's president (William Clinton) did the same thing when he took office (even more attorney's were abruptly unemployed under Clinton).

If it was me elected to office, you can be sure that everyone who didn't "fit" my administration's mission and goals would soon be standing in the unemployment line. What's so hard to understand?