Too Bad
Laura Rozen reports that Paul Farmer is out as a candidate to run USAID. That seems unfortunate, especially if it was mostly a problem with the vetting process. There are legitimate questions to be asked about whether Farmer would have made the best agency manager in the world, but there's no question he would have offered a very different model of leadership, and I still think that could have been a good thing for USAID and for the government as a whole.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.
Paul Farmer is a great and admirable physician. What was the problem with the vetting process? Yes, I think he would have been a good thing for USAID and for our government and our country.
anonymous in S. Florida Posted Wednesday, August 5, 2009 6:34 PMHaving been part of the vetting process for Presidential appointees (over 60)the current system as designed is almost impossible for those who have led a peripatetic lifestyle despite their competence. This is too bad because many of these persons could really bring their experience and knowledge to the Executive Branch with great impact. We seem to get too may shellfish as appointees. Lived lives where they sat motionless at the bottom hoping some food would drift by.
William R. Cumming Posted Friday, August 7, 2009 8:49 AM