Jack & Jill Went Up The Hill …

Looking for a Leader

The election is over; the new Congress began the duties of leading the country last week. The partisan gridlock of the 112th Congress is history (there is little doubt history will not be kind to the 112^th Congress).

Speaker Boehner was reaffirmed and the Senate Majority Leader remains Harry Reid. Finger pointing and political posturing may yield, for a while to allow something to actually get done! Is there a significant change in Congress where progress will prevail?

Did Jack and Jill go up the hill to practice partisan politics or to actually lead the country?

Jack and Jill went up the hill

Looking for congressional leaders

They found Boehner and Reid

Gave a Tug on the Sleeve

And The Action They Just Couldn’t Believe

There is a need for open and honest dialogue for the nation to move forward. The complexity of social, economic, and political issues cannot be resolved with gridlock and political ideology. There is no single political ideology fitting every situation, thus, a need to cooperate and compromise is essential to a country for progress. There are severe economic concerns for the United States, concerns tied to various facets of the government’s powers and global impact.

The tragedy in Newtown, CT renewed the opportunity for dialogue to find a balance of protection of rights for all. Job creation and

gcpower.net

health care are concerns of many in the United States. These and many other important issues require involvement of the people, not just the politicians and political action committees. One look at the We The People link on the White House Website (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/how-why/introduction) reaffirms the concerns of Americans. The website provides an opportunity to exercise your rights to petition the government and a response is provided for petitions with over 25,000 signatures.

Of course any website attempting to provide transparency is subject to misuse; for example, a petition for state secession from the union. People from each state have submitted a petition to secede from the Union with Texas having the most signatures collected at 125,000 (nextgov.com). In perspective, there are 25.6 million residents in Texas (quickfacts.census.gov) and thus, an attempt to misuse a privilege—the privilege to vote.

Another apparent misuse is the call to deport Piers Morgan of CNN for his view on gun control.  Think about this: if someone does not have the same viewpoint as others, there is no free speech, no rights to one’s view, the response is to deport? There is a need to actually listen to dialogue, yet it appears listening is not practiced (nor patience or tolerance). The petitions may provide a view into congressional thinking – the 112^th Congress could not get anything done because of a lack of respect for others rights and views. The need to have open debates and establish a national priority for progress of the country cannot be accomplished if the view of others is not met with openness. If the people are acting with disregard and responding to opposing views with talk of secession, deportation, recall of elected officials without cause, then how can we expect anything from the officials elected to congress?

theweek.com

Speaker Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Reid and members of congress: are we in for more of the same partisan gridlock and political posturing? Remember, Jack and Jill went up the Hill with aspirations of finding and learning from leaders. Of course, Jack and Jill may tumble, but at least there is action. It is time to be accountable to the people – dialogue, discourse, decision, compromise, and compassion are needed for a progressive nation.

The Honorable Profession of Lobbying

What is a lobbyist and where does this term originate? Research indicates it may have originated from Britain in the 15^th century when constituents met with their representatives in lobbies that adjoined the legislative chambers. This term may have come into the United States along with the migration of people from the British Isles to the colonies perhaps as early as the 1800’s.

In so far as the concept is concerned, the there is value and honor in providing a forum for individuals to meet with their elected officials to discuss pertinent matters. The question is whether this forum is available only to individuals of substance and influence, are the discussions for personal or mutual benefit between the lobbyist and the elected official, or are the discussions for the benefit of the community?

Today, lobbyist has taken on a negative connotation. It is often spoken of with some distaste and contempt and the individual in this profession may not be considered much better than a user car salesman.

Because lobbyists can individually or as groups provide some level of advocacy, the ethics of such an act depend on the vision and objectives of such a group. Improving automobile safety is positive; obtaining undue advantage for government contracts is obviously sleazy.

In the United States, lobbyists need to be registered per the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. While that appears to provide transparency behind lobbyist activities and individuals who are registered as lobbyists, it does not prevent such a group from hiring consultants and advisors who do not need to be registered since they are not part of such organizations. It also means that individuals who have served in the government and on committees have significant value because they understand the government machinery, have contacts and the ability to conduct affairs and expedite matters with a “wink and a nod”.

The result of lobbyism is the ability to achieve aims and goals with the reciprocal compensation for politicians through campaign funds and support by key groups. So is there really a difference between lobbyism and bribery?

Bribery is very blatant where funds and goods of value clearly end up in the pockets of elected officials and their families and friends. A very recent example is that of Richard J. Lipsky, a long-standing lobbyist with an established reputation for supporting the position of the underdogs. He was charged earlier in 2012 for bribing Carl Kruger, a powerful democratic state senator from Brooklyn. Mr. Lipsky was convicted of sharing lobbying fees with the senator and acknowledged that he had indeed crossed the line from promoting actions based on the power of his arguments to using his checkbook.

It is instructive to look into how lobbying has gained prominence in many countries across the globe. It has strong roots, for example in the European Union with about 15,000 lobbyists based out of Brussels exerting their influence on legislative matters.

Most recently, Walmart has been in the news in India where the Parliament has raucous meetings in its winter session about the fact that Walmart may have unfairly lobbied to gain an important foot hold in the large Indian retail market. Walmart executives acknowledge expenditures of $25 million of lobbyist activities, which are considered legal in the United States. American Ambassador Nancy Powell has indicated that in the U.S., “bribery” and “lobbying” are “two separate things”.

Is lobbying an honorable profession? It is probably the second oldest profession in the world. Having lived in countries with emerging and mature economies, here is a personal view: Corruption and inducements can be a way of life in an emerging economy because there is insufficient money, goods and services to go around and a second source of income is necessary to subsist. In a stable or mature economy where the necessities of life are generally available, such actions are considered unwholesome and do not normally exist as an everyday occurrence.

However, in both economies, lobbying is a fact of life and is contained at the highest levels of government and industry. Individuals at those levels consider it a matter of privilege and a return on investment for “paid dues”. It is a way of life and unlikely to change. There will be instances where it takes a necessary public hit before it is shrouded from future inquisitions.

Perhaps, when we are able to successfully deal with the world’s oldest profession, we can tackle this next.

______________________________________________________________________

Shami Dugal has lived in both emerging and mature economies. He is an optimist but a realist. He holds a Bachelor’s degree in Operations Research from University of Waterloo (Canada) and an MPA from Drake University (Des Moines, Iowa). He can be reached at shami@izehn.com.

Motivating our Public Servants

Here in Washington, DC almost every conversation has related, in some way, to the fiscal cliff. The country and the world are watching Congress and the President to see if our elected leaders can act like grown-ups and come to a compromise.

As we watch the back-and-forth of this diatribe, ASPA remains concerned about the impact on our public servants. Dedicated, hardworking employees at the federal and even the state level have become the targets of relentless attacks by our elected officials and others.  I guess it’s no surprise that a recent government wide employee survey found that employee satisfaction is falling in 66 of 77 categories.  The Federal Times who reported on the results of the survey noted:

“The results are especially emphatic because of a record-breaking 687,687 employees responded – for a response rate of 46 percent, more than double the number of any previous survey.”

And this news report is not the first to highlight the declining morale of public servants across the country. Recently, GovExecutive took a twist to this growing trend and reminded government employees and nonprofit workers WHY they chose their field. In a commentary written by Deputy Administrator at the Social Security Administration, Reginald Wells reminds:

“Without proper attention to our employees’ morale, we will be hard-pressed to weather the turbulence successfully. 

From my perspective, it all begins at the top. Leadership must set the tone by communicating service expectations and offering transparency about the nature of problems affecting the agency and its workforce.”

With a focus on leadership and their role in ensuring a highly motivated and productive workforce, ASPA has been diligent with our promotion of our Memos to National Leaders. This has been a groundbreaking effort by ASPA and the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) to highlight key challenges that face our country and to gather a group of experts to give recommendations.

Within the Memos, experts focused on ways that the President and Congress can tackle management issues. And a central theme of each memo is that our national leaders must involve the public servants whose every day job is to implement and administer policies.  It is the ‘street level’ bureaucrats who ensure that services are delivered, people are served and goods are received.  At every launch of a memo, we had an audience filled with public servants at the federal and state level who was interested in the intricacies of our recommendations. Why? Because they too want to know how they can do their job better.

As national organizations focused on good governance, employee professionalism and effective management, the Memos to National Leaders project is a rare moment when ASPA and NAPA have gone very public with their expertise. As Paul Posner, chair of the Memos Steering Committee noted at a an event this summer that revealed the first of the nine Memos, ASPA and NAPA have always been at the forefront of offering their expertise on management and administration. However, this has usually been done behind closed doors. This year, we wanted to go public because the challenges that confront the country deserve an open-door conversation.

We have garnered attention for the Memos and within the offices of those who can make a change, the conversations are taking place. But it will take time. We know this. But we want to keep the conversation going. And we will.

Read our memos and let us know what you think.  Email ASPA at memostoleaders@aspanet.org with your thoughts and comments.

Strengthening the Federal Budget Process

Rationalizing the Inter-governmental Process

Administrative Leadership

Strengthening the Federal Workforce

Reorganization of Government

Information Technology and Transparency

Managing Big Initiatives

Next Steps in Improving Performance

Managing Large Task Public-Private Partnerships

It’s Time to Move Forward

The People Have Spoken

Adamthinks.com

The Founding Fathers were hunters and gatherers in a new world, embracing a dream of living off the land, and destined to create communities mutually supporting the citizenry while maintaining a free society. Since the time the colonists were threatened by the British, the need to form mutually supported groups were needed to preserve liberty. The Magna Carta was inspiration during the American Revolution and foundation for the 5^th Amendment of the United States (US) Constitution. Mutually supported communities continued to be formed and the free market society was established. It took years for the US Constitution to be completed ratified, yet the lessons then apply in the world today. It’s time to move forward.

Formal education and years as a public administrator have provided an appreciation of the principles of the US Constitution. Application of the principles of administration is essential to ensure equality, liberty, and justice to those in the country. Public administrators and elected officials respond and work for the citizenry – those put in a position of responsibility can and are replaced at the time of election. Programs and services to the citizens of the country are to be mutually supported as a community.

Prior to the election results this message was posted on a website:

It is amazing the venom coming from those displaying support for the country and the electoral process, yet only if you agree with the same view. Disagreement, dialogue, and decisions made this country…with unity.

Pointing fingers at what did not happen is a focus on the past, not the future. Hopefully, regardless of the election result, there can be a return to the values and principal with unity. There were many responses about crying all night, upset at a state or the country for voting in a certain manner. There was a lack of response on the responsibility to vote and elect the representative to govern the country. There seems to currently be a lack of support for those elected and a lack of support of the U.S. Constitution.

The people have spoken!

The founding fathers were truly transitional – aware of the need for discourse, disagreement, and decision. The founding fathers found a way to move forward and let the people vote; those elected would represent their people, and mutually support the best interest of a majority of the citizens of the United States.

The basic principles of a collaborative orientation apply to the founding fathers and for the country to move forward today.

1. Purpose – The elected officials have a purpose; service to others and to represent their constituents. The constituents are whom an elected official is responsible.
2. Decision Making – Action is required to move the country forward. Decision making in a partisan party lines is inaction. Discourse, disagreement and compromise are needed for decision making.
3. Openness – The US is a representative republic – the power resides with those entitled to vote and those representatives responsible to the voters. Openness in information is needed across the board for effective decision making.

It is time to think of unity as a nation. Michael Wolfe on Oct 22, 2012 related in USA Today that the super PAC’s and candidates spent

wingeyes.wordpress.com

over 4 billion dollars on advertising. Arguably the advertising accomplished nothing except polarizing the nation. Polarization has resulted in anger and finger pointing with a focus on the past. Nothing can be done about the past or present, we can only look at the future. Unifying and applying the founding fathers initial principles to move the country forward may bring many people closer to appreciation of the constitutional principles and values of the republic.

Ignoring the Poor

“The politicians will remain stuck on the middle class, because poor people for the most part don’t vote in their mind. And second, both are tied to Wall Street, and Wall Street has a classic indifference when it comes to most poor people. We Americans should be ashamed when we look at the level of poverty among our fellow citizens … But poverty has always been high in America …. That means not that we’ve lost our soul that means we want to able to do something about it but our political system is so broken that the will of the people cannot filter through. It’s dominated by big money, big banks and big corporations who have their way…”–Cornel West.

With the 2012 presidential election now days away, candidates have only briefly touched on the number of Americans on food stamps and those out of work. The subject of poverty has yet to rear its head during the presidential debates or on the campaign trails.

According to a 2012 report by the US Census Bureau, the nation’s official poverty rate for 2011 was 15.0%, estimating that 46.2

ivarfjeld.wordpress.com

million Americans live in poverty, which has no statistical difference from 2010 following a three consecutive year increase. Furthermore, the percentage of families in poverty is 11.8%, an estimated 9.5 million families; 6.2% of married-couple families, 31.2% families with female householders and 16.1% of families with a male householder are living in poverty.

According to an eye-opening study by FAIR (Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting), with such an alarming poverty rate being reported by the US Census Bureau, the issue of poverty has been an invisible subject to the US media in their coverage of the 2012 election. Furthermore, the study found that poverty has barely registered as a campaign issue. Only 17 out of the 10,489 campaign stories considered the problem of poverty in any remotely substantial way.

This conscious decision by the US media and presidential candidates to ignore the problem of poverty has come at a critical moment when more and more Americans are moving towards the poverty threshold or already below it. It is unclear why politicians ignore or fail to discuss an issue that is affecting millions of Americans. However, if politicians were to discuss such an issue it would receive a great deal of attention and perhaps be bombarded with the accusation of class warfare.

Moreover, there is a great perception among politicians that the poor do not vote in large numbers. However, according to a recent Gallup poll 50% of people below the poverty threshold are registered as Independents, 32% Democrats and 15% Republicans. It is further perceived that the poor give little or no contribution to campaigns or the super PACs, leaving the voice of the poor as a mere murmur, while our politicians focus on more ‘important’ factors such as votes and media ratings or hits.

usdailyreview.com

The concern over poverty in this great nation seems to be a nonexistent political issue in this upcoming election. It is as if people with no resources or food security are overlooked by a country that seems to have other priorities.

Furthermore, neither candidate has attempted to make poverty even a minor issue on their campaign trail. Such stands by our leaders demote millions of struggling Americans to mere invisibility.

In this election where the economy and foreign policy are among the most important issues, despite concerning facts by the Brooking Institute who predicted approximately 10 million people and 6 million children being forced into poverty by 2014. Our leaders must show concern that the US has more people in poverty than any other developed nation.

What can be done you ask?

Nothing, unless our leaders decide to at least address an issue that concerns us all.

——————-

Other reports: Brookings Institute – Simulating the Effect of the ‘Great Recession’ on Poverty

Federal IT Contracting: An Interesting Read

By Daniel Eisen

In my last post I promised that I would highlight some articles I have collected on federal Information Technology (IT) contracting. The pile was taller than I thought.

My process of culling through articles kept reminding me of my how dad always used to say “how’s that going for you?” and “lots of luck”. But, I promised, so here goes.

My collection of articles on federal IT outsourcing started out as a stack of articles on private sector outsourcing. Here are a few worth mentioning.

• The Journal of Business Strategy (2004) – The 10 outsourcing traps to avoid
• The Academy of Management Executive (2003) – The seven deadly sins of outsourcing
• California Management Review (2003) – The winner’s curse in IT outsourcing: strategies for avoiding relational trauma (my favorite title)

These articles provide fascinating conversations on private sector outsourcing from its history, benefits, risks, through methods and approaches for successful implementation. It is not hard to imagine why the federal government would soon follow the same path. However, working through all of the articles focused on federal IT outsourcing two old adages kept coming to mind – “as much as things change, they remain the same” and “everything old, is new again.”

Here are some of my favorites:

From the early days, in 1996 there was a piece in the National Contract Management Journal, ‘Privatization: A Coming Wave for Federal Information Technology Requirements’. This article touts federal IT outsourcing benefits such as personnel cost savings, improved quality of information systems services, focusing in-house resources on core functions and increased access to new technologies. It also provides cautionary warnings ranging from unclear costs and benefits, the loss of control of information systems and corporate security concerns and existing union/labor agreements.

From a 1999 volume of the Journal of American Society for Information Science, I came across the article ‘Better Funding for Government IT: Views from the Front Line.’ In the piece, the author describes the federal IT budgeting process as “myopic”. Yet, there was a strong sense of optimism as the author suggest that the federal IT budgeting process could be improved through approaches and methods such as strategic planning and performance management, developing better IT portfolios, cross-boundary investments (i.e., integrating services across agencies), and sharing risks with the private sector by “linking payment to improvements in government outputs rather than the delivery of technology services.”

Jumping ahead a few more years, federal IT outsourcing is in full swing, supporting and strengthening e-government initiatives. A 2005 article in Public Performance and Management Review, ‘Outsourcing for E-government: Managing for Success’ declared that the government faced a shortage of IT skills and financial resources and through IT outsourcing could “gain access to skilled staff…with the added benefits of economies of scale.”

The author describes many familiar issues and challenges ranging from the political-regulatory environment to issues of IT compatibility and complexity. And, the transition to e-government was not just happening in the US.

A 2005 article in Information Technology and People, ‘From Government to E-government: A Transition Model’ discussed how governments could successfully make the leap from traditional government services to e-government services to “help citizens get in, find their information or transact their business, and then get out as efficiently as possible”.

It was comforting to see that the US was not alone facing many of the same issues and challenges as other developed countries as it shifted to an e-government model.

Finally, we come full circle with a very interesting 2010 working paper, ‘Federal Contracting and Acquisition: Progress, challenges, and the road ahead.’ It is worth a read (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1542830).

But, with limited space and since the “the road ahead” will be discussed in my final post, I will end things here.

I want to wrap-up by admitting that, at first, it was the titles of many of these articles that initially hooked me. Yet in the end, I was treated to many rich, vibrant, eye-opening, sometimes contentious discussions. (Google “federal IT contracting” and you will see what I mean). In my next post, it’s time to ‘geek-out’ and check out some emerging technologies for supporting and strengthening federal agency operations and ultimately the services our federal workforce provides to our nations citizens. But if you would like to read any of the above articles, send me a request in the comments section. I’ll shoot it right over.

Eisen out…

Photo Credit: http://www.itoutsourcingservices.com, http://teleburst.files.wordpress.com,  http://www.itp.net http://www.howtocontract.net, savethepostoffice.com

Oil Prices & Natural Gas

By David Chapinski

PhD student, Rutgers University

How does the New Jersey natural gas proposal help in public management?

In many states, a local utility company within a protected service area controls electricity and natural gas supply and delivery.  Pricing guidelines and other controls are set and monitored by the state in which they operate but for the most part, customers do not have a choice in supplier or price.

Today, 28 states have deregulated the supply of energy, encouraging competition and offering customers a choice of supplier, price and contract term. Electricity and natural gas are traded on the open market as a commodity so prices fluctuate with the supply and demand just like stocks.  Depending upon your risk threshold, you may elect to lock into a guaranteed price for a specific length of time or you may choose another pricing plan and term that may fluctuate with the market in hopes of increasing your savings.

As a local natural gas distribution company, New Jersey Natural Gas (NJNG) provides regulated retail natural gas service to nearly 500,00 customers.  I believe what makes the NJ Gas Proposal unique is that the interest in natural gas vehicles has been growing from both the private and public sectors.  This is especially the case for organizations with large fleets, portions of public and private bus companies and trash haulers like New Jersey Junk Removal.

Fleets are replacing older, more highly polluted diesel and gasoline vehicles.  Sure, there are underlying and intertwined goals of ensuring economic and employment growth while encouraging energy efficiency but we must remember what tradition means for New Jersey.  The traditional reliance on petroleum-based fuels for transportation has accelerated security, economic, air quality, health and environmental challenges in our country on a whole. But in New Jersey we are seeing the need for addressing a proposal like NJNG in 2012.  I believe there is a need because NJNG committed to upgrading the Clean Natural Gas (CNG) refueling equipment of two company locations (Lakewood and the Maude Service Center). That work was completed by January 2012.

But why is it so terribly important for supporters to try and gain traction?

Recently, the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (BPU) approved a proposal by New Jersey Natural Gas (NJNG) to implement a pilot program that would help stimulate the state’s natural gas vehicle (NGV) market.  Investing up to $10 million over the next 12 months, NJNG will build between five and seven compressed natural gas (CNG) refueling stations at host facilities throughout its service territory.

I have often wondered at the phenomena along the eastern seaboard, which seems to get hit harder than the rest of the country when it comes to rising petroleum prices.  Last year gasoline prices in New Jersey peaked in May when the average per-gallon cost reached $3.88.

I find it  interesting that prices actually jump annually in the spring or summer in New Jersey, as companies change the blend of fuels to meet federal requirements. This often signals that good news is sure to follow.

I also believe that New Jersey has potential to lead the way to price stability. I do not believe New Jersey residents, like myself, believe that gasoline prices will be as high as they were in Connecticut in 2011 at $4.20 a gallon in 2012. Even if they are, we can adapt because we made it through a very tough recession and are still standing together as a whole.

When we look at alternative scenarios for the future of energy in New Jersey, we must not lose sight of the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) June release of our nation’s Annual Energy Outlook, 2012 (AEO2012).

In addition to the reference projections, consumption, technology, and market trends and the direction they may take in the future, the report also shows how New Jersey will be taking one ‘on the chin’ for a very long time if we do not prove to the rest of the country that installing company-owned refueling sites offer many advantages.  I feel that there has been much less major highway experimentation taking place on natural gas in New Jersey in the last decade.

If we take a look at Table 4-10 below, the numbers are still showing the disillusion there can be any quick turnaround through natural gas proposals. The number of total alternative fuels has basically increased less than 4 percent the year prior in 2007.

Table 4-10: Estimated Consumption of Alternative and Replacement Fuels for Highway Vehicles

	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009	2008		1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
TOTAL fuel consumptiona	177,697,941	180,698.532	182,185,778	184,810,803	185,593,715	176,509,233 (R)	50	161,210,087	163,032,407	165,201,691	169,983,219	177,697,941	180,698,532	182,185,778	184,810,803	185,593,715	(R) 176,509,233	172,518,178
Alternative fuels, total	402,941	428,532	420,778	417,803	414,803	430,329	23,790	302,287	322,037	348,421	378,589	402,941	428,532	420,778	417,803	414,715	430,329	431,107
Liquefied petroleum gases	223,697	211,883	188,171	173,130	152,360	147,784		209,817	212,576	215,876	223,143	224,697	211,883	188,171	173,130	152,360	147,784	129,631
Compressed natural gas	133,222	158,903	166,878	172,011	178,565	189,358	72,412	79,620	86,475	104,496	120,670	133,222	158,903	166,878	172,011	178,565	189,358	199,513
Liquefied natural gas	13,503	20,888	22,409	23,474	24,594	25,554	5,343	5,828	7,259	8,921	9,382	13,503	20,888	22,409	23,474	24,594	25,554	25,652
Methanol, 85%b	N	N	N	N	N	N	1,212	1,073	585	439	337	N	N	N	N	N	N	N
Methanol, neat	0	N	N	N	N	N	449	447	0	0	0	0	N	N	N	N	N	N
Ethanol, 85%b	26,376	31,581	38,074	44,041	54,091	62,464	1,727	3,916	12,071	14,623	17,783	26,376	31,581	38,074	44,041	54,091	62,464	71,213
Ethanol, 95%b	0	N	N	N	N	N	59	62	13	0	0	0	N	N	N	N	N	N
Electricityc	5,141	5,269	5,219	5,104	5,037	5,050	1,202	1,524	3,058	4,066	7,274	5,141	5,269	5,219	5,104	5,037	5,050	4,956
Hydrogen	2	8	25	41	66	117	N	N	N	N	N	2	8	25	41	66	117	140
Other Fuels	0	0	2	2	2	2	N	N	N	N	N	0	0	2	2	2	2	2
Biodiesel	18,220	27,616	93,281	267,623	367,764	324,329	N	N	6,816	7,076	16,917	18,220	27,616	93,281	267,623	367,764	324,329	325,102
Oxygenates
Methyl-tertiary-butyl-etherd	2,368,400	1,877,300	1,654,500	435,000	0	0	,400	3,402,600	3,296,100	3,352,200	2,383,000	2,368,400	1,877,300	1,654,500	435,000	0	0	0
Ethanol in gasohol	1,919,572	2,414,167	2,765,663 (R)	3,729,168	3,729,168	4,694,304	500	950,300	1,085,800	1,143,300	1,413,600	1,919,572	2,414,167	(R) 2,765,663	3,729,168	4,694,304	6,442,781	7,343,133
Traditional fuels, total	177,295,000	180,270,000	181,765,000	184,393,000	185,179,000	176,078,904 (R)	4,360	160,907,800	162,710,370	164,853,270	169,604,630	177,295,000	180,270,000	181,765,000	184,393,000	185,179,000	(R) 176,078,904	172,087,071
Gasolinee	135,330,000	138,283,000	138,723,000	140,146,000	140,646,000	134,644,492	9,000	125,111,000	125,720,000	127,768,000	131,299,000	135,330,000	138,283,000	138,723,000	140,146,000	140,646,000	134,644,492	134,385,175
Dieself	41,965,000	41,987,630	43,042,000	44,247,040	44,533,000	41,434,412 (R)	,360	35,796,800	36,990,370	37,085,270	38,305,630	41,965,000	41,987,000	43,042,000	44,247,000	44,533,000	(R) 41,434,412	37,701,896

Expect NJNG’s natural gas proposal to make the necessary investments in CNG re-fueling infrastructure at locations where a company has or plans to use Natural Gas Vehicles, thus accelerating their development in the state of New Jersey for years to come and removing much older, more polluted diesel or gasoline vehicles from service. NJNG’s proposal will provide the necessary capital for constructing the re-fueling stations on the host company’s site, recovering those costs through the Clean Natural Gas Vehicle Infrastructure Program.

In other words, the company managing the quality assurance will also be required to make the Clean Natural Gas station available to the public. This is huge because we need accountability on a project of this magnitude in New Jersey.  By establishing the structure as such, I believe the Clean Natural Gas Infrastructure Program serves to accelerate the Natural Gas Vehicle market for both the anchor and company managing host area companies interested in moving away from traditional-based fuels, but unable to justify the infrastructure costs associated with installation.

Lastly, through the NJNG proposal and CNG Infrastructure Program, NJNG proposes to offer the managing company a turnkey Clean Natural Gas refueling station that will be available for their use.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Total fuel consumption is the sum of Alternative fuels, Gasoline, and Diesel. Oxygenate consumption is included in Gasoline consumption.

^b The remaining portion of 85% methanol, 85% ethanol, and 95% ethanol fuels is Gasoline. Consumption data include the Gasoline portion of the fuel.

^c Excludes gasoline-electric hybrids.

^d Includes a very small amount of other ethers, primarily tertiary-amyl-methyl-ether and ethyl-tertiary-butyl-ether.

^e Gasoline consumption includes Ethanol in gasohol and Methyl-tertiary-butyl-ether.

^f Diesel includes Biodiesel.

Can You Hear the Whistle?

Michael Pilato, creator of the Penn State mural “Inspiration,” made a change to his painting Saturday, removing the halo over former football coach Joe Paterno.  This visual fall from glory was preceded by the July 12 release of a damning, 267-page investigative report on the on-going child abuse scandal, compiled by former FBI director Louis Freeh.

Presented with the stark facts of the case, commentator after commentator has asked how years and years of abuse at a state institution occurred without action to stop it.

The magnitude and repulsive nature of the offenses are so severe; it’s hard to imagine.  But wrong doing does occur.  And if it does for the horrific, what is the prognosis for waste, fraud or less repugnant lapses?

The Freeh report concluded that Penn State officials engaged in a cover up because they were afraid of “bad publicity.”  Officials knew they were vulnerable but did it anyway.

According to Chris Gavagan, an expert on sexual abuse in sports:

“More often than not, a literal or figurative cost benefit analysis is done, an institution tabulates the price of potential lawsuits, and the decision is made to do all that is within their power to make the problem go away without reporting it to the police.”   Gavagan continues, “If there were a fire on campus, there would have been no debate as to “how are we going to handle this?”

Some Penn State staff did not report the abuse for fear of losing their jobs.  Whistleblower laws should have protected these employees but the prognosis is not good for whistleblowers.  A stunning number are subjected to retaliation.  Even when an employee does prevail it’s often after substantial personal and financial damage has occurred.

In 1992 and 2010 surveys of federal workers, approximately one-third of the individuals who felt they had been identified as a source of a report of wrongdoing also perceived either threats or acts of reprisal, or both.  Yet, fear of reprisal is NOT the number one reason people fail to report wrong doing.   The number one reason is employees do not believe anything will be done.  Multiple surveys show a lack of faith in management to act.

U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board 2011 survey data indicate those reporting wrongdoing do not place the personal consequences first.  Saving lives is more important to respondents than whether they will experience punishment or a reward, and whether the agency will act on a report of wrongdoing matters more than any fear of an unpleasant consequence for the employee making the report.

With the 24-hour media cycle and the popular anti-government narrative, even when management does the right thing the agency will still be subject to negative media as the story unfolds.  A good scandal sells papers (or internet ads) and calling out an agency head is fun sport for select elected officials.

Tom Fox of the Partnership for Public Service, notes:

“Federal workers are the perfect punching bag in an election year. The scandals offer an opportunity for some in Congress to suggest that wrongdoing exposed in the past few weeks is standard government practice.”

Federal, state, local and school public agencies employ over 21 million people.  There will be some bad apples and their scandalous acts will make headlines.  But these cases are not representative of the nation’s government employees. In fact, they are far from the norm.

What Can Be Done?

Georgetown Professor Marcia Miceli, author of several books on whistleblowing, offers ideas for managers seeking to root out those few engaged in wrong doing, including selecting a visible, highly trusted arbiter.

Other practical steps suggested by Miceli and Fox include:

1. Provide clear reporting processes and evidence requirements, in writing, with input from all levels.             
2. Act in a timely way.
3. When not confidential, communicate what has occurred, actions taken and why.
4. Ensure whistleblowers are viewed as moral heroes (not tattletales) and rewarded when appropriate.
5. Make clear the rights and shared ethical responsibilities of organizational members.
6. Acknowledge bad news created by scandals and encourage employees to raise questions in staff meetings and appropriate settings.  Rest assured they are already talking about it.  It is better for the discussion to be based on facts and addressed candidly.
7. Look for the good that comes from the spotlight.  In some cases the status quo does not work well.  This may be an opportunity for needed change.
8. Focus on supervisors and managers to support them in responding constructively.  When staff replacement is needed move forward as quickly as practicable.
9. Keep your eye on the mission.  Remind staff that their work is still important and the buzz surrounding scandal should not distract from the real services they provide.
10. Be an ethics role model.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Photo Captions: hosted2.ap.org; amitmenghani.wordpress.com; hahnloeser.com.

America in an Orwellian State of Mind

An Orwellian society, as describe by George Orwell, is the destruction of the welfare of a free society in which there is an invasion of privacy by constantly monitoring its citizens. Moreover, it is the encouragement of “doublespeak” which refers to misleading the masses to accept inconsistent policies. A great example of this is seen when the American people gave up their civil liberties and freedom in the name of national security.

On December 31, 2011, while many Americans celebrated bringing in the New Year, President Obama was busy signing into law the $662 billion funded National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which focuses on the defense of the United States and its overseas interests.  Although the NDAA addresses US national security programs and the Department of Defense health care costs, it becomes controversial when addressing counter-terrorism. Title X, Subtitle D, Section 1021 of the NDAA, which is labeled counter-terrorism, authorizes the military to detain US citizens indefinitely without trial if the government suspects their involvement with terrorism or connection to a terrorist organization. To date, there has been no law in the legislative history of the United States other than the Patriot Act which has given the President such unlimited power.

As a result of this provision the act has been seen as both a violation of international law and the laws of war. In defense of the Act, the President has assured that his Administration will not engage in any sort of unjust citizen detention. At the signing of NDAA the President stated, “I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens.” He further went on to state, “My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.” However, such statements do not prevent future Heads of State from acting in a different manner, and may result in America in fact being one step closer to becoming an Orwellian society, whereby a totalitarian government will dominate and oppress our civil liberties by fighting an endless war on terror.

The NDAA also gives the military the power to exercise firm and repressive control over the population, which in turn gives the military the power to operate outside the boundaries of our Constitution by constantly monitoring citizens’ activities to seek out persons of suspicion. Similarly, during the Bush Administration’s war on terror, the issue of detaining suspected terrorist for an indefinite period of time was brought before the US Supreme Court.  The Court held that no government has the power or the legal premise to hold a person for an indefinite period of time.

It becomes apparent that the signing of the NDAA goes against the very philosophy of our Founding Fathers who purposely created a system of checks and balances to ensure that no one governmental branch supersedes the other. With the NDAA authorizing the President and military to exercise an unprecedented amount of power unopposed, that system is rendered ineffective.  Realizing that such legislation is unjust, the Virginia Senate has taken the opportunity to stand up against the unreasonable application of government authority by passing a bill that prevents state agency from participating or assisting in the detention of US citizens.

Ultimately, although the NDAA was designed with national security in mind, it may be a grave mistake to allow the executive branch of the government to have such an unprecedented amount of power and authority. If such legislation remains, one can only imagine the abuse of power of future leaders who would allow America to closely mimic countries that use policies and mass surveillance to control their citizens. Thus, if this Act is left unchallenged we can only expect the slow destruction of our welfare, and the systematic eradication of our basic freedom and civil liberties, inevitably leading us closer to becoming an Orwellian society.

Defending the 98 percent

We all know the stories by now. Over-the-top spending by officials at the Government Services Agency (GSA), Secret Service agents hiring prostitutes while on the job, and numerous more tales of corrupt or wasteful spending by government officials.

In the wake of these scandals, Congress has convened several hearings about the issues. In addition, amendments have been offered on two bills to encourage greater accountability and transparency in government travel and conferences. A right move that demonstrates concern for better account of taxpayer dollars.

In spirit, the proposed legislations, H.R. 2146 and S. 1789 offer safeguards for federal employee spending on travel and conferences. However, ASPA and several public affairs groups are concerned that the legislations are overly expansive and could have a negative impact on the professional development of the 99 percent of federal employees. For while the recent news stories would make us believe that government is filled with corrupt, wasteful individuals many of us are aware of the reality that the recent newsmakers are the exception and NOT the rule.

That’s why ASPA is concerned about the amendments overly restrictive language around attendance and participation in conferences organized outside of government agencies. Restricting the ability of public employees to participate in professional conferences jeopardizes the important exchange of information that takes place between the public sector and nonprofit organizations.  Concerned about the impact of these particular sections of the bills, ASPA submitted letters earlier this month to several members of Congress voicing its concern.

A copy of that letter is posted on the ASPA website.

ASPA is fully supportive of the goal of reducing wasteful spending. We believe that the recent incidents have unfairly painted public servants as corrupt. Rather, our experience has shown that the majority of public servants are committed, hardworking and honest.

We heard this from several Cabinet Secretaries during the Town Hall Meeting held by the Partnership for Public Service during Public Service Recognition Week. Here’s a  video of that event.

Public Service Town Hall Meeting

As Congress continues to investigate and consider better ways to serve as stewards of taxpayer dollars, we just wish to remind members of Congress that there’s 98 percent of public servants that are already doing just that.