Those civil-service officials have a pretty good track record

Now that Social Security privatization is on the front burner, the word of the season is “divided.” The public is divided over whether Bush’s scheme is a good idea, congressional Republicans are divided over whether this fight will cost them their majority status, and, in a new twist, even Bush’s Treasury Department is divided over the merits behind the White House approach.

The Bush administration’s political appointees and career economists are divided over whether to transform Social Security into a system of private retirement accounts.

The conflict emerged last week when Edward Prescott, a winner of the Nobel Prize in economics, briefed Treasury Department economists to discuss Social Security privatization as part of the department’s effort to build support for its plan in academia and on Capitol Hill.

But sources familiar with Prescott’s presentation said that Treasury’s professional economists sharply questioned Prescott’s findings that private retirement accounts would increase the incentive to work longer, which would lead to higher economic growth.

At least until Karl Rove figures out a way to change the civil-service system at the federal level, the Bush gang has to come to grips with the fact that there are career employees throughout the executive branch, many of whom do not consider “loyalty to Bush” their top priority.

As a result, the White House has to deal with the reality of a complex sales pitch to officials working for their own administration who know enough to realize that the president’s scheme doesn’t make any sense.

What’s more, every time this has happened in the last four years, it’s the White House gang that’s been wrong.

Indeed, it’s been an interesting track record. On several high-profile issues, Bush’s political staff has clashed directly with career civil-service employees about the merit of an idea. The examples are pretty familiar.

* Before we invaded Iraq, career intelligence officials insisted the intelligence on WMD in Iraq was not nearly as clear as the White House wanted it to be. Who was wrong? Bush’s gang.

* When the White House Medicare scheme was coming up for a vote, career HHS officials said the price tag would be far greater than advertised. Who was wrong? Bush’s gang.

Now there’s a similar clash at hand, between civil-service employees who are unconstrained by the White House’s political agenda and Bush appointees, for whom politics is everything. I wonder who’s right this time?