Those managers are not Civil Servants? They were in my experience- Appointed supervisors were way way up in the chain of command.
When someone is “appointed” that means the executive officer of the State, nation, city whatever, selected them. They did not go through the Civil Service interview system, and can be fired at will.
Can someone parse out elected judges to me?
Seems like a merit based appointment system makes more sense. Maybe defined terms … but barring consulting the Bar Association how is the typical voter to be qualified about who should be judge? I like that name?
Some were, others weren’t . I was a manager who had civil service protection but my manager served at the pleasure of the commisioner of the agency, who was the appointing authority for our agency.
That’s what it means in whatever jurisdiction you are talking about. Here is the part of the NYC Code pertaining to the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner ( which is in the Dept of Health and Mental Hygiene)
(a) There shall be in the department an independent office of chief medical examiner, the head of which shall be the chief medical examiner, who shall be appointed by the mayor from the classified civil service and be a doctor of medicine and a skilled pathologist and microscopist. The mayor may remove the chief medical examiner upon filing in the office of the commissioner of citywide administrative services and serving upon the chief medical examiner his or her reasons therefor and allowing such officer an opportunity of making a public explanation.
(b) The commissioner with respect to the office of chief medical examiner shall exercise the powers and duties set forth in paragraph one of subdivision a of section five hundred fifty-five of this chapter, but shall not interfere with the performance by the chief medical examiner or his or her office of the powers and duties prescribed by the provisions of this section or any other law.
(c) The chief medical examiner may appoint and remove such deputy chief medical examiners, medical examiners, medical investigators, lay medical investigators, scientific experts and other officers and employees as may be provided for in the budget. The deputy chief medical examiners and medical examiners shall possess the same basic qualifications as the chief medical examiner. The medical investigators shall be physicians duly licensed to practice medicine in the state of New York and shall possess such additional qualifications as may be required by the department of citywide administrative services. (emphasis added)
Typically, how it works in NYS and NYC is the executive appoints the agency head who in turn appoints the other employees (or delegates his/her authority to do so.) This part of the Civil Service law requires appointing authorities to provide appointment letters to anyone appointed to the classified service, which is every position other than elected officials, appointees of the Governor or Legislature (including heads of Departments and legislative employees), and employees in professional positions in certain colleges.
There are 50 states in the US and I don’t know how many cities, counties, towns etc. And they don’t all follow the same processes or use the same terms - a county with 1500 employees doesn’t necessarily operate the way a city with 300K employees does.
Some judges are elected where I live. It’s ridiculous. The judicial candidates can’t say anything about how they might decide cases , so you might find out where they went to school, what jobs they had and sometimes “married with two kids” . You almost have to vote based on party unless you know one or more candidates personally. ( I did know two who were on the same ballot - and wouldn’t have voted for either one for dogcatcher). Appointing judges could hardly be a worse system.
Americans’ collective distrust of their own government is so extreme and widespread that they elected a Fascist tryant to protect them from it
Oh … wait … Oops.
I am influenced by party endorsement, but also by whether the bar association rates a judicial candidate as well qualified, just qualified, or not qualified.
With coroners, there is no equivalent. There’s a Pennsylvania Association of Pathologists, but, unfortunately, they don’t evaluate candidates.
This is actually a pretty deep and profound question. How am I qualified to vote on anyone or anything that I vote on all the time? Do I need to be?
It’s more a matter of where you want the decision making power to be. With the (unqualified) people, or a select (qualified) few. I prefer the people, but it’s not without problems.
I have actually met people who vote on judges based on “who has the most Irish name”.
We’ve had some pretty bad local politicians named Gallagher, who probably got in just on that basis.
Normally you do not need to be. I believe in democracy as limited government due, in part, to rotation in office. (If rotation leads to MAGA half the time, that’s a problem. I’m just thinking about normal Democrats and Republicans).
As for specialized skill local officials, like the DA and the coroner and judges, I favor them being appointed through some non-partisan or less-partisan system. I do not see what the benefit is to having the DA and judges campaign on who is the toughest on crime (or the most lenient, either). As for coroner, no one is going to campaign on what causes of death they prefer to put down on the death certificate. But the way vaccines and childhood illnesses are being politicized in my state, I think having coroners who are picked in some non-partisan manner, such as by the pathology department of the nearest large non-profit hospital, is far superior to having the issuance of death certificates devolve into the politicized environment of a red-county DA office.
It is enough to have voters vote for members of legislatures and – maybe – a top executive such as a governor.
Do those non-profit hospitals endorse candidates? If they did, there are probably enough people like you who would heed those endorsements that, in a low-turnout, low-information race like that, the endorsed candidate would win, and so the hospital effectively would be picking the coroner. If they don’t, then maybe they should start?
As a matter of structure I support the concept of our representational democracy - democratically selecting the few we have the onus to know and learn enough to be qualified and make the decisions on our behalf. But in a hyperpartisan environment that can lead to crappy outcomes. My lean remains having a non partisan (at least as much as is possible) professional standards board be in charge of selections, or minimally have a veto power over unqualified candidates.
I can tell my position is not strong at all and I could change it by tomorrow. I certainly wouldn’t want (unqualified) people to vote on which engineers should build a bridge or whatever. We don’t vote on that, but where’s the line on what people can or should vote on.
Maybe it shouldn’t be binary. I can’t quite articulate it, but if the job requires STEM to do, maybe the people vote on a few folks and a professional board picks the one, or vice versa, a board selects a few and the people pick the one. Or the people vote on a board to whose job is to decide which types of jobs shouldn’t be voted on (eg, technical jobs). Or something. Is there an elected job that solely requires STEM? Or something really technical? Is that a thing?
I mean, forgot voting based on their names, at least I know what a Judge is supposed to do and can envision what I’d want. I’ve voted on jobs I don’t even understand. What’s a comptroller? What’s a railroad commissioner? I vote on that.
IMHO we should only vote for generalists – the members of legislatures.
If even some Texas dopers do not know that the Texas Railroad Commission is, that seems to me a pretty strong suggestion that you have too many elected offices down there (as we also do up here in Pennsylvania).
P.S. Web search indicates that until 1973, when supplanted by OPEC, the Texas Railroad Commission set world oil prices. I didn’t read enough to know what they really do now, except it has nothing to do with railroads.
Of course not. They’d turn half their remaining patients into distrustful grumps (OK, less than half, because some are already grumps).
Few are like me, in that I am a Democrat who tries to find moderate Republicans here and there that I can vote for to encourage moderation. My self aside, nowadays, almost everyone who votes for row offices, like coroner, are voting their party preference. And I’m far from sure I’ve been wise in looking for ways to split my ballot. I voted for Stacy Garrity for state treasurer, and now, in running against Josh Shapiro for governor, she is turning out to be an extreme Trumper and measles death denier.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is still secretly counting two measles deaths that were deleted from the agency’s public measles data—a deletion that occurred at the direct request of anti-vaccine Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., according to two reports released today.
Early today, Reuters reported that Kennedy instructed new CDC director Erica Schwartz to delete the two deaths from the agency’s website. CDC staff had reportedly already reviewed information about the deaths and accepted the characterization that they were measles-related. Still, Schwartz deleted the deaths without objection, insiders told Reuters. According to previous reporting, the two deaths were added and then removed from the CDC’s website within hours on August 30.
So now we can expect we won’t have any more publicly reported measles deaths by the Trump administration.
I’m thinking Dante would have posited a special circle in Hell for this.
Brian
Re last post, note that Lancaster County’s elected GOP coroner, Stephen Diamantoni , still disputes the first death, which was the one where the newborn would have been fine if the family had followed vaccination recommendations.
There is no need for vaccine skeptics to dispute the second death because that baby had another disease which it would almost surely have died from, in the next year, if measles had not intervened. Here is what Dr. Diamantoni, I believe in this case more or less correctly, pointed out:
6-week-old Amish child died from measles, Lancaster County coroner confirms
So why did Kennedy dispute both cases when only the first is a real challenge to his POV? Probably because he was sloppy, or just did not know about the microcephaly earlier.
Semi-informed guess as to where this is headed: Many children, in Pennsylvania and elsewhere, who went back to school in the past week or so, are now in the incubation stage of measles. When symptoms emerge, hundreds, maybe thousands, will wind up in hospital, almost all of whom will recover without serious long-term effects. But a number will die from either short-term or longer term effects of measles. The MAHA crowd will ignore the longer term health challenges some victims will face, and try to say that the fatalities would not have been prevented by vaccination. In some cases, such as with the Amish lethal microcephaly case, it might be true that vaccine would not have helped much, but in others the vaccine would have been a pure lifesaver. Expect to see them muddying the issue.
Not all Republican coroners are measles deniers:
I cannot find the full coroner’s statement. I can only hope that it mentions the public health measure of immunization, but cannot find any quote concerning that measure in press reports.
The full statement from the Jefferson County coroner is on their Facebook:
There’s no mention of the MMR vaccine.
And in case anyone doubts that the coroner has a deep affiliation with the Republican Party, scroll down to the August 23, 2026 post, showing their Brookville BBQ Bash booth, and see how the coroner’s office prominently displays their colorful GOP elephant. I found a direct link to that one. Here’s the real America:
