|
From
the Publisher
By Roland Mangold
Will the NSDI Become "Bush"-whacked?
With signs of a slowing U.S.
economy and the reality of a Republican administration settling
upon the American psyche, a precarious political balance exists
between Senate Republicans and Democrats on issues of education,
Medicare, and Social Security, not to mention traditionally
conservative "hot buttons" of defense spending, tax cuts, and
reducing the overall size of government. It is therefore conceivable
that the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) could become
a forgotten step-child because of the wrangling that is expected
to ensue between these two political parties.
The Federal Geographic Data Committee
(FGDC) coordinates development of the National Spatial Data
Infrastructure that encompasses policies, standards, and procedures
for organizations to cooperatively produce and share geographic
data. The 17 federal agencies that make up the FGDC are developing
the NSDI in cooperation with organizations from state, local
and tribal governments, the academic community, and the private
sector.
Even before the hotly contested
election this past November, and taking into account eight years
of a relatively empathetic administration, the FGDC had recognized
they have a public relations and awareness problem, both within
the sphere of policy makers as well as throughout society as
a whole.
"It's been 18 months since the
National Geodata Forum . . . and still the NSDI remains 'our'
dominion. Because we in the federal sector are transitioning
to a new administration, our next 18 months will be consumed
by educating the new policy makers on the importance of the
NSDI ... but it will not, even if successful beyond our wildest
collective dream, cause the NSDI to move one iota closer to
reality. For that to happen, the NSDI must connect to the 99
and 44 one hundreths percent who are spatially inchoate," one
FGDC member was quoted as saying.
According to the FGDC, communities
across the nation are calling for greater assistance in dealing
with the critical issues that affect their economic, social,
and environmental well-being. Because most of these issues do
not respect jurisdictional boundaries, collaboration among stakeholders
is crucial. Communities are looking for leadership, information,
tools, and support from the federal government to develop place-based
processes.
Two questions beg speedy answers.
First, are these the sorts of issues that a conservative administration
will view as important? Second, how much attention can the FGDC
expect to receive when, two days after George W. Bush's inauguration,
that same administration began calling for a $1.6 trillion tax
cut?
Meanwhile, lawmakers from both
parties are asking for more aid to farmers, a larger Medicare
prescription drug program, and a whole host of other projects.
Add to this an increase in defense spending, funding a missile
defense system, boosting education, and reducing the size of
government, all of which Bush has proposed. He must also conserve
resources to fund his plan for self-directed Social Security
accounts, and contend with demands from lawmakers that he set
aside significant funds for debt reduction. Bush has proposed
pruning other spending as well to make way for some of the $600
billion in spending initiatives. During his campaign, Bush claimed
he would cut from the budget nearly $200 billion for domestic
appropriations through "government reform." It seems Bush's
economic plan is as muddled today as it was during his campaign,
and that he does not possess the perspicacity to understand
and manage several abstract concepts simultaneously. So, it
is unlikely that he will comprehend the importance of a complex
concept such as the NSDI. With Bruce Babbitt no longer in charge
at the Department of the Interior - the leading, and only high-profile,
proponent of the NSDI - who will be the champion for the Federal
Geographic Data Committee? Who will be the voice of the NSDI?
Already we are seeing signs of
how the new administration might be expected to govern. Andrew
Card, assistant to the President and his chief of staff, signed
out a memorandum on January 20, 2001, that communicated the
President's plan for managing the federal employment process
at the outset of his administration. This memorandum, addressed
to the heads and acting heads of executive departments and agencies
reads, "As you know, during the campaign, the President expressed
his desire to make government more responsive to the needs of
citizens, more efficient, and more accountable. The President
articulated his view of an effective federal government - one
that is citizen-centered, results-oriented, and characterized
by quality of service. To help meet these important goals, the
President proposed, among other things, to flatten the federal
hierarchy by redistributing positions and resources from high-level
managerial positions to front-line, service delivery jobs. Effective
immediately, no decision relating to hiring shall be made unless
and until such decision is reviewed and approved by a department
or agency head appointed by the President." The memo went on
to say that the use of contracts with non-governmental entities
or persons as a means of circumventing the process is not an
acceptable practice.
All this raises one final question.
What will the Bush administration make of the NSDI? Some detractors
feel it is little more than an attempt to carve out a bureaucratic
empire that merely justifies the jobs of civil servants and
administrators from the USGS, NIMA, and other government organizations
involved in mapping and geographic information. Clearly, the
FGDC has its work cut out. Educating society as to the importance
of the NSDI is a monumental task, but convincing the Bush administration
to buy into the concept may be an even tougher one.
Until next time,
Cheers!
Roland Mangold Publisher, EOM
E-mail: [email protected]
Back
|
