Ethics rules hit sub-Cabinet appointees hardest

Complying with ethics rules during the presidential appointment process is hardest for candidates for sub-Cabinet positions, panelists said Wednesday during a forum at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. "We now have a culture that pretty much says if you accept this appointment, you are guilty," said Norman Ornstein, an AEI resident scholar and moderator of the panel. The appointment process involves a maze of requirements, including financial background reports, FBI checks and congressional scrutiny that can be daunting for a newcomer. While the prestige associated with being part of a President's Cabinet more than makes up for the tortuous confirmation process, the trade-off may not be worth the hassle for a lower-level appointee, said panelist Lloyd Cutler, former counsel to Presidents Clinton and Carter. "We can't even agree on a single set of forms to fill out," Cutler said. "The forms are non-uniform and they're excessive." Senate hearings should not be required for all the thousands of appointments, Cutler said, nor should full FBI checks if the candidate's position doesn't require a security clearance. Appointees are "innocent until nominated," said panelist C. Boyden Gray, an attorney who served as director of the Office of Transition Counsel and as White House counsel for President George H.W. Bush. Gray said a growing number of factions use the appointment process to hurl unfounded accusations at candidates in an effort to promote their own agendas. "You're either a target or a source," Boyden said. "The system desperately needs reform. Simplify the system so that ethics can be applied when they need to be applied."