In due course, President Bush will pick a respectable replacement for the inadequate and inept Alberto Gonzales and restore order to a dysfunctional Justice Department.

But, with less than 17 months to go in this administration, the more significant question is whether the large field of presidential hopefuls learns from the unsuccessful tenure of a man, who was the latest in a series of close, home-state friends who were poor choices as top presidential advisers.

From President Jimmy Carter's Georgians to George W. Bush's Texans, the urge by chief executives to surround themselves with familiar faces has often proved disastrous, regardless of the intrinsic merits of the individuals involved.

It's been a special problem in choosing key members of the White House staff, appointments that often prove more important than the more publicized choice of Cabinet officers. That's because, in this age of big and sprawling government, presidents necessarily rely more on those with whom they spend every working day.

It's been a problem for those like Carter, Bush and Bill Clinton, who came to Washington directly from outside and sought to replicate what worked in the totally different milieus of the state capitals where they served as governor.

It's instructive that the most successful recent president, the late Ronald Reagan, passed over longtime California aide Ed Meese and picked someone relatively unknown to him, James Baker, as his first chief of staff.

Some administrations have proved more adept than others in their staffing. Here are some examples:

Nixon administration: John Mitchell, a bond lawyer and Nixon's law partner, became his campaign manager and then attorney general. He succeeded at the former but was a disaster at the latter, ultimately serving 19 months in jail after being convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice and perjury in the Watergate scandal. Nixon's chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, an advertising man without Washington experience, ended up in jail on similar charges.

Ford administration: Upon entering the White House, Gerald Ford did something smart: He sidetracked most of his congressional staff and brought in a new group headed by Don Rumsfeld, a former congressman who had been in the Nixon administration.

Carter administration: He surrounded himself with Georgians, many not up to the job, and resisted for some time the idea he needed some experienced Washington hands. One Georgian who was successful was Griffin Bell, a former federal appeals judge who served as attorney general, and one who grew in the job was press secretary Jody Powell.

Reagan administration: Mrs. Reagan and Michael Deaver, a longtime California adviser, persuaded the president-elect to name the wily and knowledgeable Baker instead of Meese as chief of staff. Many Californians who held key posts, like Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and political adviser Lyn Nofziger, were capable advisers who worked well with Reagan. Later, he suffered from aides like his second chief of staff, Don Regan, who didn't know him well.

George H.W. Bush administration: Baker, who was secretary of state, and many White House aides were able and experienced, benefiting from their Washington experience during his vice presidential years.

Clinton administration: Clinton was so fixated on naming a Cabinet that "looks like America" that he gave short shrift to his White House staff. It showed. His first chief of staff, fellow Arkansan Mack McLarty, was unequipped for the job, but his successor, former Rep. Leon Panetta, was much better.

George W. Bush administration: While he picked experienced Washington hand Andy Card as chief of staff, the Texans led by Karl Rove controlled the White House. Rove proved not as smart about Washington as about politics, the early departure of Karen Hughes really hurt, and Gonzales was a yes-man with little background for his job as counsel. More recent appointees from counselor Ed Gillespie to Defense Secretary Robert Gates bring valuable Washington experience, but it's very late in the day.

Even before the November 2008 election, the two presidential nominees need to start thinking about who should serve them if they win the presidency. The case of Alberto Gonzales should stand as a warning of the kind of person they should not pick.

Carl P. Leubsdorf is Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News. Reach him at cleubsdorf@dallasnews.com.