# Nepotism in the Executive Branch? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 1, 2005, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165 "2005-04-01T02:33:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/1 "2005-04-01T02:33:26Z")
We all know about Michael Powell at the FCC. But there’s more: [from the NY Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/31/politics/31homeland.html?ex=1112936400&en=0e4812f1184e8d91&ei=5040&partner=MOREOVERNEWS) > [@](#): > > President Bush has nominated the vice president’s son-in-law, Philip J. Perry, as general counsel of the Homeland Security Department, where he would oversee 1,500 lawyers who work on legal matters like Coast Guard maritime laws and immigration. Do you know what makes Mr. Perry ideal of this position? He’s been a lobbist for Lockheed Martin, specifically lobbying the Department he’ll be general counsel for now (if confirmed, “if”, yeah right). But Mr. Perry won’t be alone in working for the Bush administration. His wife, Cheney’s daughter Elizabeth, was appointed last month by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs, a postition she held in 2002-2003. _It’s a family affair_… It’s amazing to me that all of the best and brightest are kith and kin. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/2 "2005-04-01T02:47:09Z")
The Veep’s daughter had a position created for her. (Not that one, the other daughter). ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/3 "2005-04-01T02:54:28Z")
I thought this was going to be about Kennedy or Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/4 "2005-04-01T02:59:35Z")
Uh huh. I live in the DC area these days, but I’m a Pittsburgh Pirates fan because of where I grew up. I might head over to see them when they’re in town to play the Nationals. Do you know what stadium I’ll be going to? And how it got its name? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/5 "2005-04-01T03:07:37Z")
A popularly-elected Senator who was assassinated has what to do with this thread, **MM**? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/6 "2005-04-01T03:12:35Z")
Don’t be dense now, **ElvisL1ves**. It’s not like that charge was never made against Robert Kennedy, and you know it. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/7 "2005-04-01T03:20:31Z")
I don’t think it’s fair to Michael Powell to suggest that he just got the job because of his father. Obviously, being Colin Powell’s son helped, but it’s not like President Clinton just picked him out of nowhere. He had been an antitrust attorney at the Department of Justice, and before that, a fairly good attorney in private practice. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/8 "2005-04-01T03:22:32Z")
Me, dense? Try picking an analogy that works next time, MM. You know why the stadium was named after him, as you asked, and it isn’t because he was JFK’s brother. It says a great deal that that’s the best example you can come up with, in this example of the eternal GOP partisan quest for self-excusing _tu quoques_. Enjoy the game, and don’t forget to be thankful that a commitment to public service is not so rare that it can’t occur in more than one family member at a time. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/9 "2005-04-01T03:28:46Z")
For your further edification, [url=http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=K000114]here’s a quick summary[/ur] of his accomplishments _even prior_ to becoming Attorney General: > [@](#): > > attorney, Criminal Division, Department of Justice 1951-1952 … assistant counsel, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 1953; assistant counsel, Hoover Commission 1953; chief counsel to the minority, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 1954, and chief counsel and staff director 1955; chief counsel of Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field 1957-1960 What’s the guy you’re defending here done for us by comparison? But “the charge [of nepotism] was made”, you say - by whom and why? You should know damn well how easy it is to “make a charge”, and how cowardly it is to point out that “a charge was made” the way you just did. Gonna tell us the Clintons were accused of serial murder and drug-running too? It means just as much. You surely aren’t going to tell us that this Perry fellow got the job because he’s the best qualified. Dense, huh? Snork. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/10 "2005-04-01T04:27:07Z")
Well, I happen to agree that a commitment to public service can be found in more than one family member at a time. Amazingly enough, this happens on the Republican side of the aisle too. Can anyone prove that these individuals got jobs solely through family connections, and that they aren’t qualified for them in some way? I think the nepotism charge might stick then. A _tu quoque_? Some might see it that way. But please note that I didn’t exactly attack Kennedy nor defend the Republicans here. So I might be saying your side is just as bad, or I might be saying there’s no merit to any of this, really. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/11 "2005-04-01T14:20:29Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Well, I happen to agree that a commitment to public service can be found in more than one family member at a time. Amazingly enough, this happens on the Republican side of the aisle too. But did it here? What commitment to public service has this guy Perry shown so far? > [@](#): > > Can anyone prove that these individuals got jobs solely through family connections, and that they aren’t qualified for them in some way? I think the nepotism charge might stick then. Absence of evidence etc. > [@](#): > > But please note that I didn’t exactly attack Kennedy nor defend the Republicans here. Then why the crack about RFK and how a stadium was named after him? What point did you intend to make? > [@](#): > > So I might be saying your side is just as bad, or I might be saying there’s no merit to any of this, really. Weasel. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/12 "2005-04-01T14:59:50Z")
Well, let’s just check out Mr. Perry’s record. [Here’s what he did before rejoining his law firm, and before the current nomination.](http://www.lw.com/resource/Publications/PressRelease/pressRelease.asp?pid=813) > [@](#): > > Perry returns to Latham after serving at the White House as the General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). In that role, Perry oversaw White House clearance of significant federal regulations, mediated interagency disputes, addressed significant matters on the Justice Department’s civil litigation docket, formulated Presidential Executive Orders, developed and implemented several White House policy initiatives, and advised the President and Director of OMB on regulatory and budgetary matters. Perry had specific responsibility for several Administration Homeland Security initiatives and worked closely with the new Department of Homeland Security on regulatory matters (including the Department’s Safety Act regulations). He has also addressed a great variety of Medicare and other healthcare issues, both regulatory and legislative. Perry also has significant experience on environmental issues and worked extensively with the EPA, the Department of Interior, the Department of Agriculture and the Council on Environmental Quality. > > Prior to serving at the White House, Perry was the acting Associate Attorney General at the Department of Justice (the Department’s third-ranking official). While at Justice, Perry oversaw the Department’s five civil litigating divisions (Antitrust, Civil, Civil Rights, Tax and Environment and Natural Resources) and advised the Attorney General and the White House on significant civil litigation. He had a supervisory role in key environmental, civil rights and antitrust cases and litigated a host of cases challenging federal regulations, while also serving as the Justice Department’s representative on the Administration’s interdepartmental policy committees. After September 11, 2001, Perry also advised the Attorney General on legal issues arising from the attacks and the war on terrorism, including the 9-11 Victims’ Compensation Fund and other domestic consequences issues. > > …Before entering the Administration, Perry was a partner at Latham practicing in commercial litigation, arbitration, government investigations and federal administrative law. He litigated and arbitrated matters involving government contracts, healthcare, securities, intellectual property rights, software and biotechnology, and represented clients in investigations in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. In 1997-98, Perry also served as Counsel to the United States Senate investigation of campaign finance abuses in the 1996 Presidential campaigns. So the man has already been general counsel for a federal agency, and he has experience with the Homeland Security department, the Justice Department, and the legislative branch. Why, he has credentials almost as impressive as Robert Kennedy’s at a similarly young age. Given this experience, can anyone explain why this isn’t a good nomination, apart from a family connection within the administration? Keep in mind that denouncing the nomination on this basis alone would call the Kennedy nomination into question as well. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/13 "2005-04-01T15:31:59Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > So the man has already been general counsel for a federal agency, and he has experience with the Homeland Security department, the Justice Department, and the legislative branch. I wonder under which administration it was in which he gained all this experience. He sure did a whole lot of work in such a short time. I’m really impressed. The man must be a workaholic, because there’s no way his employer could possibly over-hyped his involvement in all those issues. Laying aside the mere coincidence that he’s married to Cheney’s daughter, do you not find it the least bit inappropriate that the man who lobbied the Homeland Security Department on behalf of a contractor is now that department’s General Counsel? There once was a time when ethics required professional to avoid the appearance of impropriety. It seems now that all is required is avoiding _irrefutable proof_ of impropriety. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/14 "2005-04-01T15:47:53Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > I don’t think it’s fair to Michael Powell to suggest that he just got the job because of his father. Obviously, being Colin Powell’s son helped, but it’s not like President Clinton just picked him out of nowhere. He had been an antitrust attorney at the Department of Justice, and before that, a fairly good attorney in private practice. Sure…and when his dad stepped down as SoS, Michael Powell stayed as the head of the FCC for how long? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/15 "2005-04-01T16:06:03Z")
> [@Merijeek](#): > > Sure…and when his dad stepped down as SoS, Michael Powell stayed as the head of the FCC for how long? > > -Joe But he was first named to the FCC (as commissioner, not Chairman) in 1997, when his father was in private life as the chairman of America’s Promise. I think his resignation had more to do with the fact that he had served on the Commission for almost 8 years, and was tired of it, and had been unsuccessful in his major goal as Chairman, which was relaxing the ownership rules. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/16 "2005-04-01T16:52:29Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > I wonder under which administration it was in which he gained all this experience. Kennedy gained most of his experience prior to AG in service to the DOJ in a Democratic administration and the legislative branch controlled throughout that time by Democrats. It should be recalled that his family were big political movers and shakers in the Democratic Party at this time. Murmur murmur, grumble grumble. > [@](#): > > Laying aside the mere coincidence that he’s married to Cheney’s daughter, do you not find it the least bit inappropriate that the man who lobbied the Homeland Security Department on behalf of a contractor is now that department’s General Counsel? There once was a time when ethics required professional to avoid the appearance of impropriety. It seems now that all is required is avoiding _irrefutable proof_ of impropriety. Well, you didn’t ask about this in your OP specifically, did you? You addressed the nepotism angle and made some other snide remarks, but now it looks like you’re shifting the goalposts since the nepotism tack is falling a bit flat. Is it your contention that this appointment is unethical or illegal? If so, please present some evidence that a law or regulation is being broken. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/17 "2005-04-01T17:07:20Z")
Where did you get the idea that Eisenhower was a Democrat? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/18 "2005-04-01T17:55:27Z")
Where did you get the idea Eisenhower was President prior to 1953? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/19 "2005-04-01T18:39:17Z")
As a wise man once said, “Don’t be so dense now.” RFK graduated from Harvard Law in 1951. Most of his experience from then to 1960 came after 1953. Get a calculator if the math is giving you trouble. Is it safe by now to assume you’re \*not \* going to explain why you thought it appropriate to mention him in this thread? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2005, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165/20 "2005-04-01T19:00:24Z")
Listen, chucklehead, you found it relevant to bring Kennedy’s government service into the discussion. It becomes necessary to point out at that point that he worked mostly for Democrats. He certainly did in the Justice Department from 1951-1952, which was at the tail end of the Truman Administration. From 1953 onward, he worked in the legislative branch where even the minority party gets staff appointments. After 1955, the Democrats had control of the Senate and Bobby Kennedy was given more responsibility. There’s nothing wrong with this, mind you. Democrats typically work for Democrats, and Republicans for Republicans. But if you criticize the Perry appointment as a big nepotistic mess, then what on earth is the Kennedy appointment? Good government in action? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nepotism-in-the-executive-branch/297165.md?page=2)