[Goose]

I think a disclosure requirement is reasonable and that most potential government employees wouldn't object to that. Then if the do anything that is fishy, we would know it. I think making potential employees divest or create a blind trust is such a disincentive we need to remove the requirement.

I believe Slaoui's position exempts him from even having to fill out the disclosure requirements.

You are correct. His compensation is below the cut-off for such disclosures. That is a loophole that should be closed. However, even that gets complicated. If you own an index fund that buys and sells outside your control, does that count? How often do you have to disclose? Immediately on a transaction? Once a year? Something can be done. but if it is administratively complex, people like Slaoui will just opt out.

 At a minimum, there should be disclosure, and divestment from the companies covered by Warp Speed.

BC

If you own stock in companies covered by Warp Speed, it is a tailor-made recipe for conflict of interest. Even if you behaved perfectly, the other companies may not stand for it. For that reason, I think disclosure is sufficient. If the other companies think highly enough of you to not object, why should anybody else? What if you own stock in several (pretty probable if you collected options during your career)?
We need the best and the brightest. To get them, especially for $1 a year, we will have to accept some ambiguity. In the past, we did this regularly. Disclosure is enough to protect us from corruption IMHO. It may not protect us from all bias, but nothing will do that.

[Goose]

I think a disclosure requirement is reasonable and that most potential government employees wouldn't object to that. Then if the do anything that is fishy, we would know it. I think making potential employees divest or create a blind trust is such a disincentive we need to remove the requirement.

I believe Slaoui's position exempts him from even having to fill out the disclosure requirements.

You are correct. His compensation is below the cut-off for such disclosures. That is a loophole that should be closed. However, even that gets complicated. If you own an index fund that buys and sells outside your control, does that count? How often do you have to disclose? Immediately on a transaction? Once a year? Something can be done. but if it is administratively complex, people like Slaoui will just opt out.

 At a minimum, there should be disclosure, and divestment from the companies covered by Warp Speed.

BC

If you own stock in companies covered by Warp Speed, it is a tailor-made recipe for conflict of interest. Even if you behaved perfectly, the other companies may not stand for it. For that reason, I think disclosure is sufficient. If the other companies think highly enough of you to not object, why should anybody else? What if you own stock in several (pretty probable if you collected options during your career)?
We need the best and the brightest. To get them, especially for $1 a year, we will have to accept some ambiguity. In the past, we did this regularly. Disclosure is enough to protect us from corruption IMHO. It may not protect us from all bias, but nothing will do that.