The article reflects on attempts to reform the federal government, highlighting the differences between the approaches of Al Gore during the Clinton administration and Ronald Reagan's Grace Commission. While both aimed to increase efficiency and reduce waste, Gore's strategy focused on leveraging the insights of existing federal employees, who were encouraged to suggest cost-saving measures. In contrast, Reagan's effort relied on an external group of CEOs, leading to numerous recommendations that ultimately resulted in minimal legislative action. This comparison illustrates how engagement and ownership are critical for successful government reform.
The success of reform depends on the engagement of employees with hands-on experience, as evidenced by Gore's approach compared to Reagan's more external strategy.
Gore's initiative aimed to increase efficiency by involving employees directly, rather than relying on external insights, making reforms potentially more grounded and applicable.
The Grace Commission recommended over 2,500 ideas to improve government efficiency, but due to the need for Congressional approval, little action was ultimately taken.
The award given by Gore emphasized the need to rethink costly government practices, highlighting past failures in federal reform efforts and the potential for future success.
Collection
[
|
...
]