| 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 |
