Why we shouldn’t just be worried about these new hires
After serving only 406 days as one of the most, if not the most important member, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will leave his job position on March 31.
President Donald Trump announced his plans to fire Tillerson in a tweet on March 13 and revealed the immediate replacement, Mike Pompeo, simultaneously.
While Tillerson may not have been performing up to standards of advising on foreign affairs considering his inexperience, the announcement over Twitter characterizes important decisions like this one as unofficial, inconsiderate and possibly even rash.
While the announcement breaks expectations for White House decisions, it comes with little surprise—Tillerson is far from the first cabinet member or senior staff to leave the Trump administration in the last 14 months.
While turnover is a normal aspect to any job, the current administration has an unusually high turnover rate compared to past presidents.
By the end of year one, 34 percent of senior staff members in the Trump administration had left their positions by resigning, being fired or switching positions.
When one compares the turnover rate to past administrations, these numbers embody a new meaning: President Barack Obama lost nine percent of senior staffers and President George W. Bush lost six percent by the end of year one. As Trump continues in his second year, the most recent displacement of Tillerson leaves the original turnover rate even higher at 43 percent now.
The White House must be able to replace cabinet members that do not perform up to expectations, but the consistent and rising job displacement rates destabilize the White House as a whole and require widespread training for the many replacements.
The question then becomes this: why were inexperienced people placed into top government positions in the first place, trusted with the authority to make critical political, international, military and economic decisions?
Part of the large turnover results from a more encompassing and rising problem—the tendency to hire campaign staff or close relationships to crucial White House positions rather than the most experienced.
Quick decisions to reorganize top political positions after an election and transfer of power may blind us from other potential red flags. While Tillerson did not leave his position through scandal or rumor, others before him did so.
Just a little over a month ago, former White House Staff Secretary Rob Porter resigned due to rumors of his alleged domestic violence. Tom Price, the former Health and Human Services Secretary, faced accusations of misusing taxpayer dollars for his own personal expenses.
Steve Bannon, once the White House’s Chief Strategist, left his position amidst controversy and outrage among the media. The president himself later wrote in a press release that Bannon had “lost his mind.” These examples are just a few of the 43 percent that have left the Trump administration since last year.
While many of the worrisome new hires have left the White House, we need to take a hard look at why the turnover rate rose greatly in the past year and why so many potentially inexperienced or worrisome people were hired to top government positions.
It’s time to stop rewarding simple obedience during elections and stop focusing purely on politics as a game. If this high turnover and array of scandals aren’t enough of a warning for future elections, we may never take the hint.
