A senior member of President Bush's economic team told manufacturers this summer that it is difficult for the balkanized federal government to develop vision on any policy issue and that, in particular, the Commerce Department has scant political or financial authority to influence government policy on behalf of the nation's ailing manufacturers.

The comments by Deputy Commerce Secretary Samuel W. Bodman, revealed in a transcript of a day-long manufacturing symposium in June, offer a rare dose of candor about the way Washington works and the limits of the government's power. They also surfaced just as the administration is trying to boost the visibility of its manufacturing policies, and as Bodman awaits Senate confirmation to assume the No. 2 post at the Treasury Department.

Responding to a comment on the government's vision for manufacturing, Bodman told the gathering, "I will tell you, it is very hard for this government to have a vision on anything. We are totally stove-piped, and we live within these compartments. This is not by way of a complaint. This is not by way of an excuse. It is by way of a fact.

"Congress likes it this way, and making organizational changes in the federal government is, as many of you know, a massive undertaking, a several-year job. It is not a several-month job. It is a several-year job, and so you don't do it very often, because it's certainly not worth it," he said.

As for the Commerce Department, which Bush has put in charge of manufacturing policy, Bodman suggested that it hardly had the authority to effect change in Washington .

"The Commerce Department can and will be active. I will tell you, . . . the inherent authority of this department within the government is modest," he said. "The measure of one's manhood or womanhood is one's budget size, and we have a lot of people here, but we have a $5 billion budget. That sounds like a lot. It's peanuts in this town."

"And, therefore, one deals with issues of a philosophical nature . . . by force of personality, by force of being willing to differ from the crowd and being quite argumentative, none of which falls within the rubric of how Washington runs," he continued. "Everybody in this town tries to, and works very hard at being nice to everybody else at all times, almost at all costs, and the reason for it is nobody knows who they will end up working for the next month. That's just a fact. It's not a complaint. It's not an excuse. It's a fact."

Bodman's remarks, first reported Dec. 5 in Manufacturing & Technology News, were made at an event that was closed to the media. They surfaced after Richard McCormack, the editor of the trade publication, submitted a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

The comments are becoming public after the manufacturing sector has shed jobs for 40 straight months, with employment down nearly 2.8 million from its July 2000 peak.

Administration officials have promised a renewed effort to address the manufacturers' problems. But Bodman's assessment of the Commerce Department's power appears to call into question a central plank of Bush's manufacturing initiative: the appointment of a "manufacturing czar" within the Commerce Department. Bush pledged in September to create the post of assistant secretary of commerce for manufacturing, a promise that has yet to be fulfilled, but even Bush supporters have questioned that move's potential impact.

"Commerce can't do it on its own," said Frank Vargo, vice president of international affairs and economic policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, which generally has supported the Bush administration. "It has to be an interagency effort."

Bodman's sentiment also feeds into a growing discontent with White House policymaking, even among conservatives. Bruce Bartlett , an economist with the conservative National Center for Policy Analysis, said the administration policy apparatus has become too centralized in the White House, with too little interagency cooperation or even input from the Cabinet departments -- the essence of "stove-piping."

"Those comments were amazing," Bartlett said. "Remember the old line, 'A gaffe is created when somebody speaks the truth?' I think [Bodman's] right."

Bodman did not respond to a call seeking comment on his remarks. But White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan said Bodman was referring broadly to the nature of government, not specifically to the operations of the Bush administration.

"There's no question the government has been historically associated with bureaucracy," she said. "The president recognizes that, and he's undertaken an aggressive management agenda, to rethink government so it's not bureaucracy focused."

Commerce Department spokesman Ron Bonjean cautioned that Bodman made his remarks before Commerce officials embarked on a 20-city tour to elicit the views of manufacturers on how to address their problems. The agency is expected to issue a detailed manufacturing initiative in January.

Bodman's "view is that the private sector knows best how to grow their companies and create high-quality U.S. jobs. The role of government is to create the right environment to help them succeed," Bonjean said.

When Bodman spoke at the symposium in June, private-sector participants in the Commerce forum on manufacturing did not appear optimistic about government help, according to the transcript. NAM's Vargo told the group, "It's not clear to me that the Commerce Department and its role in the government and the way the government perceives manufacturing and the U.S. role in the world economy is adequately incorporated into the structure of the government that we can make the kind of changes necessary."

Jim Zawacki, chief executive of G.R. Spring & Stamping Inc. in Michigan, challenged another Commerce Department official's positive spin of administration intentions, the transcript shows.

In an interview yesterday, Zawacki, a self-described strong Bush supporter, recalled that Bodman looked "very discouraged" at the meeting and left participants feeling the same.

"It's not a Bush thing," Zawacki said. "It's not a Clinton thing. There is no vision in this government, and what vision there is lasts two years. It's called the next election."