That’s is the question the Washington Post wants to know
One of the better spoils of winning the presidency is the power to appoint nearly 100 top prosecutors across the country.Â
Unless you are President Bush, and then you will be villified for legally firing any of them.
But filling the plum jobs has become a test of competing priorities for President Obama. While he pledged bipartisanship during his campaign, replacing the cadre of mostly conservative U.S. attorneys would signal a new direction.
Obama has not made clear how he will build his own corps of prosecutors, a group that shapes an administration’s approach to law enforcement and is critical to its smooth operation. U.S. attorneys’ offices handled more than 100,000 criminal cases and recovered $1.3 billion in forfeited cash and property in the past fiscal year, according to a prosecutors’ trade group.
The White House is under pressure from several fronts, both to appoint new prosecutors favored by members of Congress and, in other cases, to keep some U.S. attorneys from the Bush administration.
So, what will he do? Well, based on his performance so far in filling positions, we might get new US Attorneys sometime around 2012, which would be interesting, since about 40 of them appointed by Bush have left their positions. Obama cannot even fill the Treasury positions which are necessary to implement all these government programs to rescue the economy that Obama used to say was priority #1.
