A few years back I sponsored a review and plan to secure a government network environment. It was met with derision since there were no personal details on that network beyond internal staff, making it deemed unnecessary and not worthy of a hacker's time. Fast forward a few years (I was long gone) and that network was hacked 'critical national infrastructure' with estimates of a few hundreds of millions to fix it properly instead of the few millions it would have taken not so many years prior.
Morons? No, the selection process for senior government employees is heavily weighted on how they think (strategic vision), not what they know or what they can do or their leadership/management ability, and the outcomes are often that very intelligent people are appointed who are ill equipped to do difficult jobs as many in the public sees them. At the end of the day their real jobs are dealing with government/pollies/spin and ticking boxes and $$$ things, not actually achieving outcomes (if the box can be otherwise ticked), however sometimes there is congruence. It is as much on the pollies as the public service system since many of our modern pollies know more about everything than anyone and have stone heads to advice. We are not where the US is today, but there is a trend.
Lots are of the view that what the public does not know will not hurt, sometimes they bank on their successor wearing the problem so it is not a priority, and sometimes they think a problem lessens as time passes or is supplanted by more visibly serious issues. Such is the beauty of strategic thinking as it often is called into play. Our government strategic thinking stops at the next election or next sound byte blaming the 'other mob'. Imagine having to work in that environment.