Good analysis. This is one of the best syntheses I’ve seen on the subject. At least recent/current ones - which is key since the goalposts are constantly shifting and Congress is a different beast today than it was 5 years ago.
Thank you. And good point on timing. Many of these factors have been in the works for awhile but the particulars and relative importance of each one definitely changes over time, even in the short term.
And the outside cultural/political factors obviously have a huge influence too, even though I defer to others for coverage there.
One thing that will be somewhat under appreciated in terms of “here and now” factors - because of how pay tends to work within the legislative branch, inflation will really exacerbate retention problems. Relative to both the private sector and executive branch, it’s much more of an “up or out” environment, so raises haven’t been the norm in a given role & certainly not that could keep up in a 5-10% inflation environment.
The other thing in should’ve mentioned is that a lot of people were/are just fed up and burned out by the combination of COVID and January 6. I think it’s safe to say members and staff alike.
1/6 and various death threats and safety issues are definitely a factor (or multiple factors) in staff retention. For that matter, retention across many industries has been an issue for two years now due to COVID.
I’m related by blood to multiple people who worked on the Hill and then left to pursue other paths. So I have a lot of sympathy for staffers. It’s an interesting job but it can be a thankless one.
It’s interesting to note that one way to potentially cut the administrative bloat in the executive branch would be to increase the administrative size of Congressional staff. There’s probably at least a factor of 10 in terms of cutting one Hill staffer means we “need” 10 more people in executive agencies as Congress shifts more work off on the executive branch.
Good analysis. This is one of the best syntheses I’ve seen on the subject. At least recent/current ones - which is key since the goalposts are constantly shifting and Congress is a different beast today than it was 5 years ago.
Thank you. And good point on timing. Many of these factors have been in the works for awhile but the particulars and relative importance of each one definitely changes over time, even in the short term.
And the outside cultural/political factors obviously have a huge influence too, even though I defer to others for coverage there.
One thing that will be somewhat under appreciated in terms of “here and now” factors - because of how pay tends to work within the legislative branch, inflation will really exacerbate retention problems. Relative to both the private sector and executive branch, it’s much more of an “up or out” environment, so raises haven’t been the norm in a given role & certainly not that could keep up in a 5-10% inflation environment.
The other thing in should’ve mentioned is that a lot of people were/are just fed up and burned out by the combination of COVID and January 6. I think it’s safe to say members and staff alike.
1/6 and various death threats and safety issues are definitely a factor (or multiple factors) in staff retention. For that matter, retention across many industries has been an issue for two years now due to COVID.
I’m related by blood to multiple people who worked on the Hill and then left to pursue other paths. So I have a lot of sympathy for staffers. It’s an interesting job but it can be a thankless one.
It’s interesting to note that one way to potentially cut the administrative bloat in the executive branch would be to increase the administrative size of Congressional staff. There’s probably at least a factor of 10 in terms of cutting one Hill staffer means we “need” 10 more people in executive agencies as Congress shifts more work off on the executive branch.