Yuval Levin

They've had a really hard time talking about the government in the first person, seeing themselves as the people governing. They're still approaching government differently. as something they act on rather than act through. And so I think a good example of that is the freeze on federal grants that we've just seen come and go pretty quickly. That felt a lot like the travel ban from the first time.

They've had a really hard time talking about the government in the first person, seeing themselves as the people governing. They're still approaching government differently. as something they act on rather than act through. And so I think a good example of that is the freeze on federal grants that we've just seen come and go pretty quickly. That felt a lot like the travel ban from the first time.

And in fact, as soon as it happened, I went online and said, when was the travel ban? And so the travel ban was a week after the inauguration. It was January 27th of 2017. The freeze on federal funding was also a week after the inauguration. It was January 27th, exactly eight years later. And they had a lot in common.

And in fact, as soon as it happened, I went online and said, when was the travel ban? And so the travel ban was a week after the inauguration. It was January 27th of 2017. The freeze on federal funding was also a week after the inauguration. It was January 27th, exactly eight years later. And they had a lot in common.

They were both bold kind of steps that tried to do something big all at once, and they were not thought through in practical administrative terms. What's this going to look like on the ground? And it's because they're thinking about... presidential power as a concrete reality and the people affected as an abstraction when it's actually the other way around.

They were both bold kind of steps that tried to do something big all at once, and they were not thought through in practical administrative terms. What's this going to look like on the ground? And it's because they're thinking about... presidential power as a concrete reality and the people affected as an abstraction when it's actually the other way around.

Here's how this would have happened in the Bush years. And I don't suggest that George W. Bush was the model of governance in every way, but I worked there and this is how it would have happened. You would have had a meeting at OMB where you bring in the chiefs of staff or senior political appointees from the various cabinet departments and

Here's how this would have happened in the Bush years. And I don't suggest that George W. Bush was the model of governance in every way, but I worked there and this is how it would have happened. You would have had a meeting at OMB where you bring in the chiefs of staff or senior political appointees from the various cabinet departments and

lay out for them what's in this memo, what is it going to mean for you, and then take hard questions and some stupid questions so you can work through what is this really going to produce that we're not thinking about. And somebody in the back of that room would have raised his hand and said, well, so are we shutting down the Medicaid payment portal? And

lay out for them what's in this memo, what is it going to mean for you, and then take hard questions and some stupid questions so you can work through what is this really going to produce that we're not thinking about. And somebody in the back of that room would have raised his hand and said, well, so are we shutting down the Medicaid payment portal? And

Somebody at OMB would have said, well, no, we're saying this doesn't affect payments to individuals. And the guy would have said, well, those payments actually go to hospitals. Am I supposed to shut them down? And there would have been a conversation. They would have said, no, we're not touching Medicaid. Instead, what happened was they just did this.

Somebody at OMB would have said, well, no, we're saying this doesn't affect payments to individuals. And the guy would have said, well, those payments actually go to hospitals. Am I supposed to shut them down? And there would have been a conversation. They would have said, no, we're not touching Medicaid. Instead, what happened was they just did this.

And the guy who runs the Medicaid payment portal in Baltimore shut it down. And, you know, there was a banner on the website that says we're shutting it down because OMB told us to. That kind of practical chaos, OMB exists to avoid that, and they're clearly not working to avoid it.

And the guy who runs the Medicaid payment portal in Baltimore shut it down. And, you know, there was a banner on the website that says we're shutting it down because OMB told us to. That kind of practical chaos, OMB exists to avoid that, and they're clearly not working to avoid it.

They do come in with a sense that the bureaucracy is hostile to them and has to be fought. but they also come in with a sense that chaos can serve their purposes. And I think these are two different assumptions and that the second one is profoundly mistaken. So the buyout is a very, very interesting experiment.

They do come in with a sense that the bureaucracy is hostile to them and has to be fought. but they also come in with a sense that chaos can serve their purposes. And I think these are two different assumptions and that the second one is profoundly mistaken. So the buyout is a very, very interesting experiment.

A lot of these folks do just want to do their jobs, but there are some among them who really are very hostile to the administration's intentions. The question is, how do you deal with that? How do you make your way through it? Now, look, in the long term, there's certainly an argument for driving some churn in federal employment, for driving some turnover, for bringing in some new blood.

A lot of these folks do just want to do their jobs, but there are some among them who really are very hostile to the administration's intentions. The question is, how do you deal with that? How do you make your way through it? Now, look, in the long term, there's certainly an argument for driving some churn in federal employment, for driving some turnover, for bringing in some new blood.

I can see that. But in the medium term, and politics is a medium term business. In the medium term, this is going to bring chaos. So think, for example, about what they're doing to their new political appointees. You have all these people who are just now getting confirmed by the Senate. They're coming into these departments. Some of them are quite new to these places.

I can see that. But in the medium term, and politics is a medium term business. In the medium term, this is going to bring chaos. So think, for example, about what they're doing to their new political appointees. You have all these people who are just now getting confirmed by the Senate. They're coming into these departments. Some of them are quite new to these places.