If I were POTUS, I would define and publish a time line for filling positions for which I have responsibility. Appointments must happen in a timely fashion to keep government services operable.
If I were POTUS, all appointments I would make would be reasonably qualified to do the job for which they are being tendered. They would also not be in a position to have a conflict of interest and have demonstrated a mission similar to that of the job.
If I were POTUS, I would explore the option of turning more political appointments into career positions. Currently, a POTUS administration is responsible for appointing people for approximately 4000 positions, 1200 of which require Senate approval. Many of these jobs should have little to do with politics, being more about skill and experience in particular areas. The problems with this are numerous, including:
- Jobs simply go unfilled,
- Jobs get filled with people based more on the patronage system than on expertise and experience,
- Jobs have changing personnel with each administration, thereby losing familiarity and experience,
- A huge amount of time is spent just filling jobs with each administration,
- The Senate plays politics and drags their feet in reviewing candidates with the hope they will get a different appointee with the next administration instead of doing their job for the people, and
- The potential for conflict of interest and other ethics issues is much greater.
Too much time is spent, in a four year cycle, just changing personnel who should really be working for the American people in the first place instead of working for whichever POTUS appointed them. This country deserves to be run more by the business of government than by politics.
If I were POTUS, I would extend current guidelines regarding the "revolving door" of political employees to something that better separates influence. The common two years is not very effecting when business planning is much longer term. Two years is just a short part of a business plan. I would need further deliberation and input, but I think 10 years is more appropriate to the goal of removing direct industry influence in government. The government is supposed to be for the people, not for any particular industry. Even our industries have cross purposes. For instance, the renewable energy industry and fossil fuel industry are generally cross purposes. One industry should not get more influence in government than another industry. Government should be about a holistic, long-term sustainable plan for the country with the greatest overall benefit to the people.