Treasury Secretary Geithner Announces His Chief of Staff Choice

President Barack Obama's first choice for Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, was confirmed and sworn into office January 26, 2009. Secretary Geithner, himself not oblivious to some odd nods due to his failure to have paid income tax for four years, has appointed Mark Patterson to the position as Geithner's chief of staff, as reported in The Wall Street Journal.

Patterson, recently a lobbyist for the Goldman Sachs Group, will fall under President Obama's executive orders limiting the activity of people who have recently been lobbyists to the federal government and their ability to interact in some government activities.

Obama's executive orders, put into place soon after inauguration, were in keeping with his campaign promises to limit the influence business has in government. Under those orders, former lobbyists are not allowed to work on those things for which they had previously lobbied for a period of two years.

Considering that Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. according to the "About Us" page at their website is "a bank holding company and a leading global investment banking, securities and investment management firm" it is confusing to me how much of Patterson's work as chief of staff for the treasury secretary won't be placing him in a conflict of interest on many occasions (Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.).

The old adage that "rules are meant to be broken" seems to apply in the case of other appointees of the president, including Patrick Gaspard who holds the position of political director in the new administration, and who formerly was a lobbyist for the Service Employees International Union, seeking to expand funding in the area of children's health care (WSJ). Gaspard will need to recuse himself from any pending legislation on that topic.

The waivers of these people who have provided service to the government in other areas beside their lobbyist positions doesn't seem all that substantial, given that each individual and their superiors understand the topics from which each person must maintain a "hands-off" policy, but I wonder as the days and months pass by, just who will be responsible for ensuring that those mandates are followed, and does the mere presence of these individuals in the high positions they hold have an underlying sway on legislators. Time will tell.