The Irrelevance of the Cabinet?
Entre no LibraryThing para poder publicar.
Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "inativo" —a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Reative o tópico publicando uma resposta.
The larger truth is that modern presidents, with a few exceptions, don’t need, and don’t use, Cabinet members as privy councillors on the most important questions. They have other people for that. Presidents do need competent, even if anonymous, executives to run the vast machinery of the federal government, but most Cabinet secretaries don’t really do that either—at least not in the classic C.E.O. sense—leaving such work to their deputies and the professional civil-service staffs.
In some ways, members of the Cabinet have become like U.S. Ambassadors to rich countries: they are chosen because of past service, not because of present competence. Of course, members of the Cabinet are far more visible than Ambassadors so they have to at least pretend to run the show, and they will at least need to be able to give testimony to Congress on their area of coverage. But other than that, they are more likely to be order-takers than they are to be advice-givers, particularly those Cabinet members who run the minor departments like Interior and Labor and Transportation. And they probably don't even take orders from the President, but instead from members of the President's staff.
I'm not sure if this change is bad for the country, but I think that it isn't good. The people who are the President's primary advisers should have to pass through public scrutiny. The public has a right to know who is whispering in the President's ear.