PUBLISHED 5-31-2005

A common thread in numerous cases of  incompetence and illegal activities of Bush administration appointees is the weakening or  ignoring of the Hatch Act.

Despite substantial legal hurdles, Congress must act to reverse erosion of a law intended to insulate government from political self-interest and corruption.

The 1939 law named after its author, Sen. Carl Hatch of New Mexico, originally  restricted almost all partisan activity by federal employees. It strengthened federal civil service rules and helped assure citizens that they were being dealt with fairly by federal employees.

But in recent decades, the Hatch Act has been weakened by court rulings that it infringed on the civil rights of federal employees. Congressional actions liberalized some of its terms; agencies turned a blind eye toward infractions; and exemptions were given to presidential appointees.

Two things must be done to restore  credibility to the act. Both can be done by   Congress.

First, the number of mid- to high-level political appointees who are exempt from coverage by the act must be reduced.

Second, everyone who is a political appointee must undergo ethics and conflict-of-interest training that stresses the values of the Hatch Act.

It is the widespread exemptions to the law that are at the heart of many problems that have arisen during this administration. Just a few of them include:

• The firing at the behest of top White House officials of U.S. attorneys for overtly political reasons.

• The appointment of Michael Brown, a well-healed political contributor to the Bush campaign, as head the Federal Emergency Management Agency. He had no experience in safety, emergency preparedness or managing a large bureaucracy. That accelerated an exodus of experienced professional mid-level managers with disastrous consequences during the Gulf Coast hurricanes and other natural disasters.

• Admissions by an aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales that she screened potential appointees for federal jobs on partisan or ideological grounds.

• The now-rescinded appointment to the Consumer Product Safety Commission of a lobbyist for the National Association of Manufacturers — the very type of businesses the agency oversees.

• The appointment of Bush political contributors and party loyalists as federal immigration judges. They are among 200 such appointees with little or no background in immigration law.

• The White House briefing of General Services Administration administrators and other departments’ staff identifying ways federal resources could be used to benefit Republican candidates in tough political races.

• The ignoring of safety violations and taking of retribution against whistleblowers by a NASA inspector general.

Many state and local governments mandate conflict-of-interest training for all employees. It should be no different for high-level federal officials.