Obama's Transition Team Will Employ 450, Have $12 Million Budget

At a briefing before well over 100 reporters, John Podesta, the co-chair of Barack Obama's White House transition, announced three priorities for the interim period and laid out just how comprehensive the effort would be.

The transition team will operate off a budget of $12 million ($5.2 million has been appropriated by Congress, the rest will be raised separately through individual donations of under $5,000), employ 450 people and operate out of offices in Washington D.C. and Chicago. Already, Podesta reiterated, the team has granted 100 interim security clearances.

As for the priorities - they resembled the same major interests Obama announced repeatedly on the campaign trail.

• The team, Podesta said, would be "laying the groundwork in stabilizing the economy and putting Americans back to work."
• They "also will be engaged as is required and necessary in national security issues that remain constant throughout the transition."
• And, of course, there is "the task of building a government."

Podesta called for an accelerated process when it comes to appointing potential cabinet members, saying that past "expedited" efforts by president-elects were not fast enough for this go-around. As such, he called on both parties in Congress, the current administration and relevant agencies to work together to help get a team in order, quickly.

"So far that has moved smoothly," Podesta said. "We anticipate that we will be able to both make appropriate selections, and get those people through the clearance process, which sometimes can get bogged down. There will be adequate recourse devoted by the FBI and other agencies."

"We are hopeful that we can do a good deal better than previous administrations," he added. "And frankly, if you look at the findings of the 9/11 Commission, we need to do a lot better."

Later in the briefing session, Podesta was asked about one cabinet position in particular: the Secretary of Defense. Reports have surfaced in recent days that Obama was considering keeping the current occupant of that post, Robert Gates, in office. Podesta did not hint which way Obama stood on the matter, saying only that a review for that position was taking place.

"He has great respect for Secretary Gates," he said, "but beyond that he intends to engage, as I suggested, across the board with the agencies."

At the meeting Podesta also announced what the campaign calls the strictest, and most far reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history. The rules, which were reported a few weeks ago by the Huffington Post, are:

• Federal Lobbyists cannot contribute financially to the transition.
• Federal lobbyists are prohibited from any lobbying during their work with the transition.
• If someone has lobbied in the last 12 months, they are prohibited from working in the fields of policy on which they lobbied.
• If someone becomes a lobbyist after working on the transition, they are prohibited from lobbying the Administration for 12 months on matters on which they worked.
• A gift ban that is aggressive in reducing the influence of special interests.

Comments

[Tom Payned]

After his supporting Leiberman for his chair in the Senate, my wallet is now closed. I voted and donated for change, not for politics as usual, which is no accountability.

Should have known better after the FISA vote.

[MOFOUHO]

Clean Government is why Obama was voted in...Where did you hear that? He was voted in because They needed a crook from Illinios who did nothing for thier state. Now they bring him to the white house so he can be a uncle tom for all the other crooks.

[Abo]

Really, ethics?
Like softening the ban on lobbiests?

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/articles/2008/11/12/obama_softens_ban_on_hiring_lobbyists/

[RRoadrunner]

A good start, I hope he goes deeper. I still see too many gray areas and loop holes....

[LeftLeanWing]

It's been a week !

[RRoadrunner]

Part-1
Compiled from various sources. WE NEED CLEAN GOVERNMENT that's why we voted Obama in:


The Boston Globe's front-page headline: "Obama softens ban on hiring lobbyists." "President-elect Barack Obama, who vowed during his campaign that lobbyists 'won't find a job in my White House,' said through a spokesman yesterday that he would allow lobbyists on his transition team as long as they work on issues unrelated to their earlier jobs. … [I]ndependent analysts said yesterday that the move is less than the wholesale removal of lobbyists that he suggested during the campaign -- and shows how difficult it will be to lessen the pervasive influence of more than 40,000 registered lobbyists. 'That is a step back and there is no other way of seeing it,' said Craig Holman, who lobbies on governmental affairs for the watchdog group Public Citizen. Nonetheless, he said, Obama is still making 'a very concrete effort to avoid what I consider a potentially corrupting situation.'"

[RRoadrunner]

Part-II

The New York Times adds that “the new rules do seem to leave some wiggle room. Aides to Mr. Obama, who declared during the campaign that lobbyists would not ‘find a job in my White House,’ said the guidelines allowed for lobbyists to work on the transition in areas where they have not done any lobbying. Further, the rules apply to lobbyists who must register with the federal government; many people who work for lobbying firms or in other areas of the influence business in Washington do not have to register, because they do not personally lobby federal officials on specific issues.”

Bloomberg notes that while lobbyists will have a hard time getting in the door, major bundlers for Obama who did not lobby will be able to be involved.

AND HERE WE GO AGAIN.......

[fussygorilla]

AIPAC, AIPAC, AIPAC, AIPAC,..........

ABOLISH AIPAC.

[haval2]

the ugliness the GOP tried to serve up to the nation is thankfully gone though still spewing lies. Obama with the help of those who supported him will be the ones who saved our country. there hasn't been anything but foul air for 8 years. we can breathe again and rebuild because we have a capable leader.

[StillAmused]

"... the strictest, and most far reaching ethics rules of any transition team in history."

Necessary, after witnessing the most flagrant, repeated and far-reaching ethics violations in American history.

Don't forget the one that forbids serial lying and fabrication on the record... oh, yeah, and ANY reference to "God" giving the President personal instructions.

[Lulliloo]

This is great news but the ethics reform here is far too narrow in scope. I/we would welcome any other blogger/commentors to add to this list:
1) mis-use and abuse of political, financial/insider power or public trust for personal political or financial gain
with the full disclosure, prosecution, with full refund plus punitive damages,

2) full exposure, prosecution of those violating the U.S. constitution, federal and state laws not limited to the investigation and prosecution of the War in Iraq and the corruption, especially that leading to the financial crises.

3) the abuse and misuse of power and the public trust by those in charge of the Financial Bailout Package.
,
4) removal from office or position for obfuscation, refusal to make full disclosure of these Financial Bailout funds:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/11/neel-kashkari-bailout-cza_n_142916.html
"This arrogant Czar of Chutpah & Co. just gave away two trillion dollars and is miffed when questioned as to whom, and has only time for two or three glib questions?
Leo Rosten must be spinning in his grave."

4) The grievous abuse of the First Ammendment with blatant serious lies during the course of ads and public claims makes a statement that is patently false and readily proven to be false then that person or entity should be heavily fined, prosecuted, and a public appology to the wronged party broadcast through the same media stating their claim(s) were knowingly false.

[ladyv]

The rules are for the transition team, not the administration. One would assume ethics policies relevant to the administration itself will be put in place at the appropriate time.

[LMurphy418]

I am so proud to have help elect such a competent individual.

[noneIn2008]

It seems like EVERY President introduces new and improved ethics rules. Yet, every time things get worse and the gang gets more linked to special interests. Why will this be any different? Any bets on how many months for the first indictment.

[Diogenis]

You fear clinging to hope and determination. Change that. It is in your hands.

[Larkinvos]

You are right, Diogenis. I can feel the fresh air blowing.

[larmarch5]

"Why will this be any different?"

Because of the way Obama's campaign raised money: small donations from the grassroots.

[SecondBase]

If the past performance of the Republican party is any indication they won't be going after indictments of members of the Obama administration - rather they will be issuing subpoenas by the truck-load.

Henry Waxman once counted up the number of subpoenas the Republicans issued to the Clinton administration, and if my memory serves it came to either 1,052 or 1,053.

Can anybody guess how many Clinton-era Republican subpoenas turned out Democrat indictments?

Basically the Republicans used the litigious maneuver of issuing subpoenas as a form of legal harassment for the purpose of obstructing the business of the executive.

Of course as we've seen in the past eight years with the less than called-for number of subpoenas the Democrats have issued to the Bush administration - if you're a Bush operative you don't need to show up for a subpoena.

We get precisely the government we allow.

[FreedomRyder]

Obama is just like Clinton bringing in all of Clinton's old buddies. Emanuel, Podesta, Biden, Summers, Robert Rubin. Who's next, Janet Reno? He's knee-deep in lobbyists trying to make everyone think he's for change. What a load of cr ap. And you libs fell for his BS.

[noneIn2008]

I'm surprised not to yet see Sandy Burglar.

[Diogenis]

Change your name then....to SlaveRyder. You are your own worse enemy.

[lblondon]

Bottom line, he needs to bring in competent, qualified individuals that can get the job done in a hurry. Who would you suggest he bring in - Joe the Plumber and Tito the Builder? Give me a break and give him a chance!

[tibetanprojection]

Well said. I don't understand this desire to be negative. Obama is a great man, and he is already effecting enormous changes. We can't all rely on one man, however, for change. We must stop this negativity and permit ourselves to percieve and then rejoice in positivity.

[Countdown09]

The people of this country wanted a 'CHANGE" of policies. Who makes those changes I personally couldn't care less. I have faith Obama will provide the leadership needed to make the necessary changes regardless to who he hires. I know people like yourself are hoping O bama fails but something you might want to consider, if he fails he'll be fine, you on the other hand might not fair so well. So I'd rethink the negativity.

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

Oh, yes SlaveryRyder.....we should have elected McPalin. Oh geez, ya kno, that would be so much more of the same.

[ProgressiveInAZ]

Wow, I am impressed with the ethics rules! Way to go Obama!

[MrPompous]

Why not ban lobbyist period? Didnt he say no lobbyist would serve in his administration?

[AbbieXHoffman]

Because they represent people's/groups interests and that is a good thing.

It's not their lobbying that's the problem, it's the money they give politicians (who claim they need it to run) that has the problem because they want favors for it. If you take the money out of it, then there is no problem. We actually need lobbyists. Shocked?--it's true.

Lobbyists in their true form are good--the are industry experts who bring their industry's interest to the goverment. And they are not just corporate lobbyists--there are lobbyists for unions, for the environment, for abortion rights, for just about everything. Without them, the elected officials wouldn't get the information they need to make informed decisions about issues. They actually educate our elected officials on issues. We need them, just without all the money.

Now (since taking special interest money is considered so bad and since campaign finance is officially dead) no one who isn't independently wealthy or famous will be able to effectively win a senate/congressional seat. There aren't too many people who can inspire and raise money in the fashion BO did.

[jingles32]

Excellent post.

[iamnumba1]

So what would you suggest aspiring politicians do?

[truesteam]

He is going to quell lobbying interests in the transition? I could cry!

[realistnotsocialist]

what's all this paranoia about big government taking over b.s. The government is there to, uhmm let me think for a sec...govern! So let them do their jobs and don't start silly remarks of a dictatorship. The situation we're in today is largely due to a government that did not do it's job.

[wdw102]

so you want to give them more power? good thought

[allheart72]

YES!! Give them power. This is a government under new management. Intelligent management. The new administration believes that government has a job to do....and they do. Their job description is to get the economy going, settle these wars, fix healthcare, fix social security, fix education...should I go on???

So it sooo good to have people ready to roll up their sleeves and work as opposed to the last administration that decided to do as little as possible. And that is why America FIRED them.