Loss, departments and agencies that carry out the policies. It was not always the case. Trumane 1952 president wanted to bring into the white house both the republican and democratic essential nominees to meet with his cabinet and white house staff members, he met with a partisan divide. He had wanted them to come in because he found when he came into office, he was unprepared. He came in january of 1945. Roosevelt died in april, and truman knew nothing of the atomic bomb. Seared by that experience, he wanted to bring people in so they would understand what was ahead of them. Adelaide stephenson accepted, but general eisenhower turned down trumans invitation, in large part because he said he was running against the administrations programs and from the public would be coming into the white house when he was running against it. Truman was very upset. He sent a handwritten note, which she would sometimes do because he could slip by staff, and they would not see it and stop him. So he had a handwritten note to eisenhower commenting on his own way of looking at the turned on by the general. He wrote i am extremely sorry that you have allowed a bunch of touples t of screwballs come between us. [laughter] you have made a grave mistake and i hope it will not injure this public. This handoff no longer distinguishes between one the successor our 5 panelists today are in shape to discuss the transition, as each of our officials has gone through one or more of them at a senior planning level. Additionally they are all involved in current efforts to fortify the transition process, and find areas of agreement that will ensure a president ial transition in a bipartisan seven, which is the theme of our conference. Our conference is one of three that we were told at texas president ial libraries. The other two will be at the lbj library september 22 and 23 dealing with National Security. 10 october 18 at the george h. W. Bush library on crisis management, with two scenarios, a financial, and National Security crisis. Theme of thed this importance of bipartisanship in transition. We are going to begin with two chiefs of staff who know the beginnings and the ends of both administrations. Mclarty came in at the end of the Clinton Administration as chief of staff. Josh bolten was chief of staff at the end of the Bush Administration. The transit vision of office out of george w. Bush changed the tone and actions during the transition period. In 2008, president bush led to the most determined transition out of office we have experienced. He began the transition cycle in 2007 in discussions with his chief of staff josh bolten. Bolten, in turn, closed the circle that truman proposed to structure by having representatives of the incoming and outgoing chief executive meet well before the election. Togetherd representatives in july, almost two months prior to the 2008 party convention. Clay johnson, who led the transition as executive director for president bush into office in 2001, was the deputy for management at the office of management and budgets, and let the department and Agency Planning gathering information. Panel. Be on her second equally important and the 2008 transition was interest in making use of those administration preparations by those leading the transition effort for senator and then president elect obama. Executive director of the early transition planning effort for senator obama was in those july meetings, and worked with bol ten and his deputy on the bush team. Keith is now the deputy secretary in the department of labor, and involved in the transition out of office of president obama. Codirector of Agency Review for obama, also began work in july assembling teams to go through the departments and agencies to collect information on programs, staff positions, and upcoming schedules and budgets. President bush and his team willingly lead a transition ofort, whose results president elect obama was eager to use. All of our panelists are solidifyin efforts to the gains in transition planning, and find ways to expand areas of agreement, such as the president ial appointments process. Mclartyarty mack along with clay johnson has been leading the Aspen Institute for this process. Lisa brown was part of a congressional and Obama Administration appointment reform effort. They are knowledgeable and well set to talk about the transition. Our Program Comes about through the work of many institutions and individuals. Our catalyst have come up for me distance to speak analysts have come to speak. We thank them for coming here to talk about this subject. Thank you alan for the support of the moody foundation, and for your interest in our product. We appreciate it, and also the work you are doing in the president ial Leadership Program you support. Next, the george w. Bush president ial center has provided our space, as well as significant logistical support. We thank you holly, as well as your colleague brian and his director of operations justine, director of events. The director for Public Policy is our partner who we are coordinating with on the white house transition project. Finally we thank the staff of the white house transition project, who have worked for our conference and on our analytical programs. So now lets begin with josh bolten and mack mclarty, who know transitions through their work as chief of staff. This will be followed by a program on the president ial appointments process, and a discussion of the administrations transition out of office. Thank you. [applause] sit wherever you like. I am sitting here. [laughter] you can tell who is in charge. Host the 2008 transition was viewed by old size as the best by all sides as the best that we have had. You outlined a tension that has not previously been the case. I wonder if you can talk about the elements that you see that were important in that transition. Good . S it so you for thenk recognition of the work of the Bush Administration, and that the president did himself. That is my answer to your question. It comes from the president. Mack knows this better than anybody that so much in a president ial term and in the executives agenda comes from what the president says he, or eventually she is interested in. That was certainly true of the 2008 president ial transition, w bush directed me more than a year before the transition. You mentioned late 2007 when the first time the president spoke to me as chief of staff. He talked about how important he thought this president ial transition would be. Because it was the first president ial transition in our modern history during which our homeland was under threat. 9 11 changed everything. The bush presidency, but also our country. He was determined that we not ofve unnecessary period vulnerability during the early months of the increment president s administration, regardless of the party. Wasnext president irrelevant to president bushs consideration when he gave me the direction to run the most effective and most complete transition, in american history. I had been on both ends of a transition already, both going out of bush 41 administration, and coming into the bush 43 administration. In a bipartisan way. It was something that did not attract a lot of attention. Not a question of ill will. Not a question of partisanship. Mack, i think you will agree. Mr. Mclarty i do agree. Mr. Bolten it was a question of, we dont need to do that. They will learn on the job and they have time to get their feet on the ground and run the place the way they want to run it. We dont need to spend a lot of time doing preparatory work for the next gang that probably isnt particularly welcome in the first place. So it was definitely a change of psychology. Wed in the 2008 transition, ultimately had a terrific partnership with a well organized obama team that will be represented on your next panel. Host directions did he give you . What directions did he give you . Mr. Bolten the truth is that i dont really remember. [laughter] but i do recall that it was not detailed instructions. Wasnt george w. Bushs style, to say i want to make sure i have all of their appointments in place, and that the briefing books are here anybody who does george w. Bush erows knows that he is a lead and a man of principle. He empowers people to do their jobs. He considered it my job and the job of staff, the job of clay johnson to figure out what the details were. What i do recall him saying very exclusively is, i want these people to be prepared as possible to deal with a crisis should one have it on the first day of the next administration. Order and a a tall major undertaking in any administration. Host in fact, there was a threat on the inauguration. Mr. Bolten there was. Concernedrticularly during terrorist attack the actual inauguration. It is a moment of really extraordinary peril in this ,ountry if you think about it because so much of the government actually moves. In other systems, a few people at the top move around, but most of the government remains in place. In our system, the top few thousand leaders in government are actually replaced in a transition, especially between parties. Basically everybody who used to be there is out all at the same moment. It is not like a slow process, you know, one month a few people come and and so on. It is noon on january 20 every four years that the people who have been in charge suddenly have no authority anymore. They are done, you are out, your badge doesnt work, you cant get back into your office. Nobody either expects to or should follow your instructions, of all the people that work for you. It is a very abrupt change in our system. I remember walking into the 2001. House on january 20, you kind of luck in to a blank office. There is nothing on the walls. There are a few supplies on the desks. There are computers, but nothing in the memory banks. You might know the phone numbers of a few of the people you might need to reach. But it is a very complete and abrupt transition. And for the country, that is a real period of vulnerability. I dont think it lasts all that long in the stark sense i am talking about. For those first few days in crisis, the people that need to make decisions might not even know how to reach the other people that they need to reach to take action. What we did in the transition was wein 2008 to 2009 did our best to prepare the incoming folks to work with each ther and also to pair up outcome in people with the incoming people. We held a tabletop exercise in early january in which we assembled cabinet officers who were relevant to a National Security crisis. Oldssembled in the executive office building. We had all the old officials from the Bush Administration that would have been involved in a National Security crisis. The secretary of Homeland Security, National Security health, the secretary of what we postulated was a chem bio attack in the united states. Had all of the right officials, who in the Outgoing Administration, knew each other and who did what in case of a crisis. We brought in their incoming counterparts. We went through the tabletop exercise with the old people sitting next to the incoming people. I dont know i dont know how much you can learn in a threehour tabletop exercise about how to act in a crisis, but the main thing was that they laid eyes on the other people with whom they would need to communicate. And i will bet for most of the people in the upcoming obama cabinet, that was the first time they had met the fbi director, who transitions across the ministrations because of his position. And he would be a key person to know and communicate with in the event of a crisis. Mentionr thing i will that we did. We asked the Homeland Security whoetary michael chertoff, had planned a vacation with his one beginning at 1 00 p. M. January 20 [laughter] we asked him to stick around for a day. Wasng inauguration day, he in an offsite with the incoming secretary of Homeland Security, in a control center where they could monitor all of the threat information. We asked him, even though his authority would be eliminated as of noon january 20, we asked him to stick around, be there for napolitanosecretary as she takes the reins. It turned out to be important because there was a threat on inauguration day. It turned out to be a credible but not actual threat. Intelligencedible suggesting an attack at the inauguration itself, on the mal. Prepared. Perfectly we werent perfectly prepared. I imagine if that happens in 2017, we would be prepared a lot better than 2009. But we at least had thought about it, had talked with folks, and had our people as wellpositioned as we could under the circumstances have a smooth handoff. Host and i note of bipartisanship, napolitano and chertoff both worked as prosecutors and knew each other very well. It wasnt easy discussion between the two of them. Easy discussion between the two of them. Mack, can you talk about your transitions into office with president clinton . Mr. Mclarty i would be glad to. It is a great privilege to be here. Always great to be with chief bolten. Our transition was quite different. It was a different time and place. I think josh makes a key point about 9 11 changing the fundamental psyche of our country. Personal security became National Security and vice versa. I think it affected transitions. Hours was at a much earlier time. Ours was at a much earlier time. Governor clinton, like most president ial candidates before him, was very concerned if you have a serious effort of transition, it would be easy for the press to say well, such a show of arrogance here, measuring the proverbial grapes in the oval office. And indeed with president obama, there was a little talk about that with his transition efforts after 9 11. That was part of it for sure. From her timeers working with Vice President gore, unlike josh, i came into the transition late serving as a chief executive officer of the New York Stock Exchange gas company. You came in knowing some of the people, but not all. Positive side however, governor like most candidates, had laid out a clear agenda of what he wanted to accomplish in his first 2 years and 100 days of office. That laid out a roadmap of the policy for the administration. I think secondly during the transition, a high priority was placed on the selection of the. Of the cabinet. I think our work reflected that. Historians have talked about the loyalty and competency and engagement of the cape and it of the cabinet in the Clinton Administration. We spend a lot of time integrating the Vice President s office, which was clearly a priority of president elect clinton. President , the vice including president bush 31, had not been fully integrated into the presidency. Where we got behind the curve is on the selection of white house staff. I think that was a setback for us. Although on the policy side, we were able to move far with the economic plan. We were able to move forward with the cabinet. I like so much the theme of bipartisanship. We did receive good cooperation from the republican members of Senate Getting out cabinet members in place. Our cabinet members in place. As clay johnson and chris lu knows so well, that is only the start. You have to get assistant secretaries in place. That was our experience. On the National Security front, it was before 9 11, before the terrorists events we have been so troubled about. It was a different landscape, although there were vulnerabilities. I do think you had a very experienced team interNational Security that had worked during the campaign. They were able to make that transition. The final point that josh has to, the has alluded real two hallmarks of a transition, besides being prepared and starting early, which is not more which is now more understood and accepted. I was recently speaking with a governor at the National PressAssociation NationalGovernors Association this weekend. Transitionsal how are held it is that moment in a 77 day period where there is so much to be done, so many various stakeholders to respond to. It is a moment where it is essential to pivot from campaigning to governing. That is the hallmark of any successful transition. Host how do you make one of the aspects of moving from campaigning to government, there are different needs in a campaign. The rhythms of the campaign are different because you are trying day, that you have a policy agenda that is limited. But when you come in to govern, you need people that are less partisan in a sense, once with experience in the washington community. Because you are going to move from one issue to another, where you may have coalitions of then your in one, and enemies are your friends the ones afterwards. When you have Campaign People, their mindset is, your guy is good, your opponent is bad. How do you make that transition of personnel . Of bringing in people that are appropriate for government . And what do you do with the Campaign People that you want to reward . How does the president deal with that . Mr. Mclarty i am getting a headache just trying to remember all of these problems. [laughter] pointke the right professor, because you do have people in the campaign that have truly worked their hearts out for the candidate in that campaign. In many cases, made tremendous sacrifices. They have taken a leave of absence from their job or work. Austin, texas or wherever and spending a year plus of their lives to get george bush or bill clinton elected. I know the saying is well understood in texas, being a neighbor in arkansas. You do have to be pretty steely empathetic, but that you are moving into a different passage. There are different requirements. You have to have a blend of those in the campaign that are wellsuited to make that transition to government. There are usually a good number of those people in the policy realm. But you need new people, broader people. In our case, governor clinton