Congress must slam the Heidi Overton window shut

Britain and Russia engaged in the Great Game in the late 19th century, in which they dueled for domination in Central Asia. The game was important to the countries involved, and the prize was thought to be worth the investment of lives and treasure.Britain eventually won that game. One reason was its investment in professional diplomats and bureaucrats who could deliver results. George Orwell, for example, learned about politics while he served as a young, subdivisional police officer in Burma, at one point shooting a rogue elephant to protect villagers and, of course, himself.Modern political games involve less violence and loss of life but can also have serious consequences. Take the theater of the absurd known as a Washington congressional hearing. “I understand the game,” Sen. John N. Kennedy (R-LA) said during a recent hearing with the director of the FBI. “People try to make you look bad. We do the same thing when the other party’s in office.” Kennedy is a Republican from deep-red Louisiana, but he understands that there is every chance that, come January, a Democrat will hold the gavel of his committee and the game board will be flipped against his team.There are more than 1,300 executive branch appointees who require Senate confirmation, so that provides plenty of room for games. But if the system is working well, the competition should focus mostly on those nominees at the highest levels of government. Ambassadors deserve strict scrutiny, as they will be the face of America in other lands. Still, many are appointed for political reasons rather than their expertise in languages and diplomacy. After using a 2014 hearing to expose several of Barack Obama’s nominees as unprepared hacks, Sen. John McCain said sarcastically, “I have no more questions for this incredibly, highly qualified group of nominees.” Cabinet secretaries, too, are fair targets for strict scrutiny, since so many of them are appointed for political reasons, or simply because they are friends of (or fundraisers for) the president.However, other jobs — even those subject to Senate hearings — should be handled below the radar and yet remain above the game. These are the jobs that require competent people to deliver for the public. Consider jobs such as the leaders of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. These nominees should be experienced public servants, selected for their knowledge of the weather and measurement standards, respectively. If they are, the Senate should wave them through. Likewise, the president should name an experienced bureaucrat — probably somebody we’ve never heard of — to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Meanwhile, that same president may opt for a political appointment — perhaps a former House member or senator — to be the FEMA chief’s boss at the Department of Homeland Security.Of course, the quality of the nominee also matters. Dr. Nicole Saphier seems likely to be confirmed to the important post of surgeon general after she recently told senators that she has “not seen reputable evidence that would suggest that vaccines cause autism.” Saphier, with her medical experience, was nominated after another nominee, “wellness influencer” Casey Means, flamed out. Something similar should happen at the Food and Drug Administration. On Sept. 24, the Senate is expected to take up the nomination of Heidi Overton to run the FDA. But she doesn’t have the background to qualify for the important role.Overton has been working behind the scenes as a member of the White House Domestic Policy Council. But while that’s raised her visibility in GOP circles, it hasn’t prepared her to oversee the FDA’s broad food and drug responsibilities. Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), who will handle her hearing, warned that “her lack of managerial experience does not prepare her well for leading a large organization that is already dealing with staffing and morale issues.”PANCREATIC CANCER HAD A 13% SURVIVAL RATE. TRUMP’S FDA JUST CHANGED EVERYTHINGSuccessful FDA heads have had plenty of relevant experience. Dr. David Kessler had run an advisory committee that considered the FDA’s missions. Dr. Scott Gottlieb helped implement the Medicare prescription drug benefit. Overton also lacks experience in food safety, which remains a significant part of the agency’s mission, as illustrated by this year’s cyclospora outbreak.The quality of a nominee matters in any federal job, but especially in technocratic leadership positions. Instead of playing the usual games, senators should pass on Overton and demand a nominee with experience managing the FDA’s scientific, regulatory, and public health responsibilities.Rich Tucker is a freelance journalist and opinion writer who lives in Richmond. He writes the Student Driver on Substack.