I think the real concern here is with a system that doesn’t provide assurances to people like you and me that federal appointments are based on merit–not with this particular appointment itself. Of course, that’s easy for me to say–I go to church with Tim Heaphy and know him from local law and local politics, and know him to be one of the smartest, most upstanding people I could imagine to hold this post, and I know he will serve the Justice Department and the people of the Commonwealth well in his new job.

But one shouldn’t have to know the guy to know that he deserved it, so I’ll leave you with a rhetorical question, and one designed to maybe hone the approach to the problem at hand:

First: Would you even _want_ a federal appointee to be someone who had never shown an interest in government and civic life?

Second: If we can’t just say that contributors can’t get appointed, let’s try to think about how we can provide added transparency and accountability to the federal appointment process so that we’re weeding out any quid-pro-quo behavior and providing assurances to the public when appointments are deserved, without limiting ourselves from appointing well-qualified people who also happen to be politically engaged.