Anti-nepotism proposal
Oct. 26th, 2007 12:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dsrtaoThere are 250 million+ US citizens. The total government payroll is 2.4 million full-time employees. In other words, about 1% of the population.
My first suggestion is that no one shall serve in an appointed, confirmed or elected office of the Federal government who has a close relative [1] serving in such a position concurrently.
My second suggestion is that no one shall serve in an appointed, confirmed or elected office of the Federal government who has had a close relative serving in the same or a closely related office in the past twenty years.
I'm perfectly willing to extend this to the state level, as well.
[1] Close relative, for this purpose, is a direct ancestor,
descendant, spouse, spouse's ancestors and descendants, sibling, or sibling's descendants. For the sake of argument, anyway.
My first suggestion is that no one shall serve in an appointed, confirmed or elected office of the Federal government who has a close relative [1] serving in such a position concurrently.
My second suggestion is that no one shall serve in an appointed, confirmed or elected office of the Federal government who has had a close relative serving in the same or a closely related office in the past twenty years.
I'm perfectly willing to extend this to the state level, as well.
[1] Close relative, for this purpose, is a direct ancestor,
descendant, spouse, spouse's ancestors and descendants, sibling, or sibling's descendants. For the sake of argument, anyway.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-26 04:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-26 05:18 pm (UTC)I view the current inhabitant of the Oval Office with alarm.
I am not sanguine about any of the current candidates, and not inclined towards Mrs. Clinton.
I don't believe in ex-post-facto laws, so have no worries that Quincy will suddenly be stripped of his presidency retroactively. The Roosevelts were fifth cousins; I have trouble justifying a prohibition on that degree of consanguinuity.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-26 05:25 pm (UTC)