Dear Editor: Has the embedded “deep state” of career Washington bureaucrats enabled the appointment of puppet-like political figureheads to lead key federal agencies? Are we relying on appointees better suited for and attuned to hearing complaints than to provide informed, forward-looking leadership and direction? Are these people simply running complaint bureaus and shilling for Congressional funding rather than focusing on effective and efficient delivery of services and anticipating future organizational direction and needs? The inevitable exposure of ambitious officials given prominent roles as political rewards or for symbolic reasons rather than applicable expertise is becoming evident. The lack of specific, practical knowledge of airline operations, for example, forces “policy guidance from below” from Department of Transportation staffers familiar with the workings of that complex industry. Could the devastating socio-economic effects of the present uncontrolled invasion of illegal immigrants been mitigated by a competent Secretary of Homeland Security less willing to practice hands-off administration? Is the notion of governance by competence rather than patronage really so repugnant when all Americans are affected in some way? Might an executive decision to select an agency head from the opposite political party actually help to overcome present polarization causing legislative dysfunctionality and citizen unrest? Phil Osifer