I think RFK’s phrasing of the purview of HHS was actually accurate, though:
Throw in the
And you’re pretty much there.
Even if he doesn’t have the Senate I suppose he’d make RFK Jr the permanent “acting” director.
Perhaps appointing such an obviously unqualified person to run such an important government department is how Trump will finally “drain the swamp”? Because I can well imagine many career staffers quitting in disgust.
It’s worth remembering: that’s a (‘F’ is for) feature, not a bug:
I’m not sure that will be a factor.
A lot of these people will take “serving the public” seriously, and recognize that just up and leaving the department entirely in the hands of the crazies will be an unmitigated disaster.
A lot will also not be willing to blow up their own lives by quitting. Trump has vowed to purge the government anyways, so anyone quitting is likely to be facing a job market saturated by other ex-government employees. Better to wait to be fired, which would take a bit longer, and might give you an exit compensation package.
Were any of those positions in an agency?
(a) For the purpose of this section—
(1) “agency” means—
(A) an Executive agency;
(B) an office, agency, or other establishment in the legislative branch;
(C) an office, agency, or other establishment in the judicial branch; and
(D) the government of the District of Columbia;
Please see Mr. Elon Musk on your way out the door. He’ll have your check for you 
He can’t. There is a 210 day cap, and as far as I can tell it can’t be a newly-appointed person; they have to be someone already in the department filling the role of their absent superior.
When Trump was filling cabinet vacancies, he was filling previously-filled positions that had become vacant by appointing someone already in that department. He wasn’t picking people off the street to fill an “acting” position, because the law doesn’t let him do that.
It’s nothing new, he appointed Scott Pruitt as head of the EPA. Pruitt had spent years trying to hinder the EPA as an anti-environmental activist, and that’s who Trump put in charge of the agency. Appointing RFK Jr to head HHS is just more of the same, really.
Hey, 50k employees, times, say, $500k each, only $25 billion, he can afford it. That’s what, about 56% of what he wasted on Twitter?
If he really believed that getting rid of that many government employees will really turn the country around, he’d be a traitor not to buy them all out.
That’s why they were ultimately permitted, at least I assume that was part of it. But it wasn’t initially obvious in either case that the appointments wouldn’t run afoul of the law.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/kushners-appointment-brings-attention-to-anti-nepotism-law
One potential conflict is related to a 1967 statute called the Federal Anti-Nepotism Statute. The law, known as Section 3110, was passed as part of a Postal Service reform law, and it states that an executive agency official can’t appoint relatives, including sons, daughters and sons-in law, to “a civilian position in the agency in which he is serving or over which he exercises jurisdiction or control.”
There has been considerable debate about Kushner, or another Trump family member, serving in an official White House role and how that relates to the statute.
A similar controversy also took place in the 1990s when President Bill Clinton asked Hillary Clinton to lead a health-care task force that held closed-door meetings. In a 1993 lawsuit, a federal judge ruled that some of the Clinton task-force meetings needed to be held in public, but he also rejected the argument that the First Lady was a “government employee.”
That blog post notes that there are some legal scholars who, like others in this thread, believe that the law shouldn’t apply to presidential appointees of any kind. But clearly others disagree, and for many decades it hasn’t been challenged.
And I’ll also add:
Two recent White House ethics counsels, Richard Painter and Norman Eisen, also believe an appointment such as Kushner’s would violate the Anti-Nepotism Statute.
Again, this isn’t an obvious issue where of course it wouldn’t apply. There is a considerable amount of legal debate over it. Ultimately, both Hillary Clinton and Jared Kushner were able to serve in the roles that they were appointed to, and the justification as given is that the law doesn’t apply to White House positions specifically.
True but he is also not beholden to Trump. He will always have access to political power by virtue of his last name. So I would still say he will likely not get a look in
Still it’s all pretty academic. RFK and Musk are the most spectacularly unqualified, hideously inappropriate cabinet picks imaginable but they would not be close to being the worst people in the administration if Trump wins on Tuesday.
Some of you act as though a good kakistocracy builds itself.
Far from it, I would argue.
The likelihood of an RFK, Jr. Secy-HHS thing seems to be increasing … rather precipitously:
ETA: Annnnnnd, it’s official (Trump > Truth Social)
Well, it’s been nice knowing you America. I think we may need to start requiring measles and polio vaccine proof for American visitors to Canada in a few years.
You’ll need to administer the vax’s right there at the border. The old USA was allergic to any sort of tamper-resistant records, and the new USA will be even moreso.
No credential any Brave New American might present at your border won’t be worth the paper/bits it’s printed on/with.
If they are signed with the trustworthy signature of Matt Gaetz we wil have to accept it. As long as they are under 18…
On the other hand, this might be an excellent time to invest in American companies that make raw milk, dental amalgams and antihelminthics.
If I had had a brain parasite, I might feel the same way that Kennedy does??
Vaccine uptake won’t change much in the short term.
A Canadian view…
Since the presidential campaign-related one is now closed: RFK Jr Files to Run for President (Dropped Out on August 23, 2024) - #942 by dtilque
Birds of a feather: https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/11/14/congress/republican-lawmakers-are-taking-rfk-jr-seriously-00189599
“RFK Jr. has big asks of Washington. Republican lawmakers say they’re open.”