A very simple bill to improve American diplomacy

I see no delegated power allowing congress to do this so there’s a sure separation of powers court fight ahead if it passes.

I’m also not the least bit convinced that lifelong bureaucrats are any more qualified for the position of ambassador.

I also see a clear conflict in that our Ambassadors would be pursuing their own agendas going forward rather than their constitutional duty to represent the administration before foreign leaders.

This looks bad all the way around.

1 Like

This statement is not only wrong, it is wrong to the point of being insulting.

First of all, bureaucrat is nothing but a pejorative for civil servant. It might interest you to know that every Soldier, Sailor, Airman and Marine is a bureaucrat, every last one. Both military and civilians serve their country for a defined remuneration, yet only civilians are insultingly broad brushed with the bureaucrat pejorative.

And yes, Career Foreign Service Officers are by far and away the best qualified people in the world to serve as Ambassadors and it isn’t even close. Not anywhere being close.

Career Foreign Service Officers:

  1. Must graduate from a Foreign Service program, such as the one at Georgetown University.

  2. Must have native level fluency in at least one foreign language.

  3. Must compete with other applicants on the Foreign Service Examination.

  4. Once in the Foreign Service they typically go immediately overseas to their first assignment which is low level. They start out at the paltry sum of $35,085.

  5. Over the years, they go from assignment and gradually increase in rank and responsibility, all the while accruing valuable experience and knowledge.

  6. But, all the while, they are still competing with their peers and if they fail to advance fast enough, they will be forced out of the Foreign Service under the UP or OUT system. This ensures that the best of the best reach the top ranks.

  7. Once they do reach the top levels of the Career Foreign Service and want to enter the Senior Foreign Service, they must be competitively recommended AND receive the nomination of the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES and confirmation by the UNITED STATES SENATE. If they get all that are appointed to the lowest Senior Foreign Service Rank of Counselor, then and only then can the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES nominate them for an Ambassadorial post.

  8. Even then, they still face up or out. To avoid early retirement, they must repeat the above for promotion to the rank of Minister-Counselor and repeat again for promotion to the rank of Career-Minister. If they make Career-Minister, then and only then can they ride to mandatory retirement at age 65.

Patronage Ambassadors qualifications:

  1. Raise a **** load of money for the Presidential candidate.

  2. Kiss said Presidential candidate’s/President’s ass.

That is the sum total of the qualifications to be a Patronage Ambassador. Many Patronage Ambassadors don’t know a second language at all and in many cases don’t know the language of the country to which they will be assigned. Many know pathetically little about their assigned country. NONE have foreign service experience.

Again the quoted reply is just so absolutely wrong to be an outright insult to the people of the United States Career Foreign Service. Career FSO’s, by the way, put their lives on the line for their jobs and a number have died for their country.

1 Like

.
.
But Safiel…

What do you really think?
.
.
.
.WW, PHS

:smile:

I wish more conservatives would think more like this.

It is not a damn game.

When did Republicans start believing putting elite, highly educated people in important positions, become a bad thing?

No it isn’t.

You’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

Those serving in the Military are not civilians working in The Bureaucracy nor are they mere paper pushers likely to have their own agendas.

Diplomats however are.

Saf isn’t a conservative, he’s a libertarian of sorts with some conservative leanings.