The 'Full Responsibility' Dodge

Here's the Associated Press on the flap around massive delays at the State Department in processing passport applications:

The current passport mess is rare among government foul-ups: A top federal official has publicly taken the blame and expressed regret.

"Over the past several months, many travelers who applied for a passport did not receive their document in time for their planned travel. I deeply regret that," says Assistant Secretary of State Maura Harty, who is in charge of passports for U.S. citizens. "I accept complete responsibility for this."

But is it really "rare" that government officials accept such blame? As I wrote a few years ago, there is actually no shortage in government of people who take "full responsibility" for bad things that happen. In fact, they do it all the time. Donald Rumsfeld did it after the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal came to light. President Bush did it after the failed federal Hurricane Katrina response. (And Louisiana's Democratic governor, Kathleen Blanco, did it relative to the state response.)

What is lacking is actual consequences for failures. Meghan Daum, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times, had a great line about this in reference to L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's recent acceptance of "full responsibility" for his relationship with Telemundo newscaster Mirthala Salinas:

The "full responsibility" phrase has been uttered with such astonishing frequency by people who mean precisely its opposite that it's become conversational filler, a throat-clearing noise so inconsequential that most listeners forget that they heard it as quickly as the speaker forgets that he said it.

I won't pass judgment on whether Maura Harty actually has "complete responsibility" for the passport delays. For all I know, many people and systems were to blame. But if she insists that it's her fault, then I have to ask, what are the consequences?