A good article with important points about these grave risks. But while the 1984 statute did seek to make the appointment without regard to political affiliation, it is not true that the position has never been political. Politicization of the Archivist—both by those seeking to control and use the agency, and by Archivists of the US themselves—began decades ago, and has varied over time. Those of us who have fought for many years to reform the agency and the laws relating to it, especially attempting to further insulate it from political pressure, have been met with resistance from both parties, as well as monied interests. This egregious and unwarranted (although legal) firing and the likely nominee dash all hope for any such reform for at least four years, if not longer.
As for what has happened, I guess this would be better categorized as corruption, but it was committed by one of the three most political US Archivists
As for what may happen, the Archivist has duties and responsibilities outside of any partisan interests. For example, if POTUS wishes to destroy presidential records, they must first seek the views of the Archivist; who, if they disagree, must report it to the House and Senate. In the case of records POTUS should obviously not destroy, not doing so would be a political act. Also, POTUS does not have automatic access to the records of their predecessor, and must make the case to the Archivist that access is needed to conduct current operations of the presidency. Granting POTUS such access when it is clearly for retribution or other partisan purposes would be political.
There's lots to be alarmed about - How I wish more people had been alarmed before Election Day - and now, I wish the Democrats would take drastic action - like walking off the House/Senate floor to deny a quorum. Vance is already setting up a showdown with the judiciary - fascism, here we come.
I don't mean to pry (actually I do, I'm just trying to be polite, lol!), but do you have a journalism, law, or a political science background or did you just naturally fall into this because you saw the asteroid picking up speed towards Earth?
All that said, I completely understand if you'd prefer not to answer in such a public forum.
A good article with important points about these grave risks. But while the 1984 statute did seek to make the appointment without regard to political affiliation, it is not true that the position has never been political. Politicization of the Archivist—both by those seeking to control and use the agency, and by Archivists of the US themselves—began decades ago, and has varied over time. Those of us who have fought for many years to reform the agency and the laws relating to it, especially attempting to further insulate it from political pressure, have been met with resistance from both parties, as well as monied interests. This egregious and unwarranted (although legal) firing and the likely nominee dash all hope for any such reform for at least four years, if not longer.
What is an example of political action by an Archivist?
As for what has happened, I guess this would be better categorized as corruption, but it was committed by one of the three most political US Archivists
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-02-13-mn-1361-story.html
As for what may happen, the Archivist has duties and responsibilities outside of any partisan interests. For example, if POTUS wishes to destroy presidential records, they must first seek the views of the Archivist; who, if they disagree, must report it to the House and Senate. In the case of records POTUS should obviously not destroy, not doing so would be a political act. Also, POTUS does not have automatic access to the records of their predecessor, and must make the case to the Archivist that access is needed to conduct current operations of the presidency. Granting POTUS such access when it is clearly for retribution or other partisan purposes would be political.
There's lots to be alarmed about - How I wish more people had been alarmed before Election Day - and now, I wish the Democrats would take drastic action - like walking off the House/Senate floor to deny a quorum. Vance is already setting up a showdown with the judiciary - fascism, here we come.
I have called my Senators and emailed them to but not sure my voice is being heard. What more can a citizen do?
That's a really solid start. Keep urging action - keep sharing information. Resistance requires persistence - thank you for taking action!
This is some scary stuff! Any reactions from supporting staff?
Not that I've seen. Archivists and librarians tend to be a bit more covert with their defiance.
I'm going to be sick!!
Marie, I really enjoy your writing and analysis.
I don't mean to pry (actually I do, I'm just trying to be polite, lol!), but do you have a journalism, law, or a political science background or did you just naturally fall into this because you saw the asteroid picking up speed towards Earth?
All that said, I completely understand if you'd prefer not to answer in such a public forum.
But yes. The astroid spurred me to put a unique set of skills to use to maintain some degree of sanity.
A lady never reveals her secrets ;)
I totally understand! Thank you for putting those unique skills to work in a public fashion...it benefits all of us (and your sanity, of course)!