Geez - can you please dispense with the oversized pictures - that just scared the hell out of me.

We’re in the few months right after an election, when the Post can be honest about Democrats. Tune in around March for the usual fluff.

C’mon Nick. Are you being serious. The editorial page of the Post usually endorses Democrats. I very rarely vote for who the Post endorses. The editorial board tends to be liberal. I tend to be conservative. I don’t question their sincerity. I just don’t agree with them on many of the issues. But why must you always question the Post’s integrity.

You complained forever at Messenger who anyone with a fair understanding of the sunshine law would realize was more that fair with the Blunt administration.

I think this is a good editorial and I am glad to see the Post hold Nixon accountable. The appointment may be good politics because Donnelly has a lot of supporters in the St. Louis area. But it isn’t good for the state. I would argue that given a choice between something that is smart politics but poor public policy and something that is good public policy Nixon will almost always take politics over what is right.

Margaret Donnelly may not have a degree in public health but her years of experience overseeing the DHSS budget on the House Health & Mental Health Appropriations Subcommittee, along with her outspoken advocacy for accessible, affordable health care, make her more than qualified. I’ve sat in amazement as she grilled DHSS officials on every program, and held them accountable for every tax dollar. She knows this department inside out, backwards and forwards, and will do a great job.

As Jay wrote in another blog (see below) it isn’t about how nice Margaret is or how good she was as a Rep. It is really about upholding the contitution. I wonder if Nixon’s team of attorneys were even aware of the constitutional requirements for the position.

“Margaret is a wonderfully nice person but that doesn’t make her qualified for the job. Nixon will be sworn in and will say in his oath that he will uphold the consitution. Is he serious? She doesn’ meet the qualifications in the constitution for this position:
Director, appointment–compensation–qualifications.
192.007.
2. The director …shall have had the administrative experience necessary to enable him to successfully perform the duties of his office. He shall have experience in public health management and agency operation and management.

It’s obvious that Nixon doesn’t really mean he will uphold the consitituion - he was just kidding - and it will be interesting to see if the legislature who took that same oath today is any more serious when they decide whether or not to confirm this appointment. It shouldn’t be a done deal especially if health is supposedly a priority in this state. Senators, we are watching! Make him appoint someone qualified with a real health background. Her resume shows nothing in public health nor operation or management of any organization. We deserve better.
This isn’t the kind of change we voted for.
Jay 1/7/09″

And Mr. Carlton must not be famliar with Ms. Eckstein’s resume. She far exceeded those requirements with experience in all areas that the DHSS oversees -community and public health, clinical experience in many areas at several hospitals, along with experience in mental health, nursing homes, child care, management, corporate wellness, teaching in the school of public health, a WU MBA and much more. Those of us who worked with her rank her among the best directors we have had and she did more for public health in her tenure than many before her. Nixon should have asked her to return.

Margaret, in addition to being an attorney, has a bachelor’s and master’s degree in social work. It’s true that a degree in social work isn’t the same as a degree in public health, but it’s absolutely unfair and insulting to social workers to call her a mere lawyer. Social workers have a long and proud tradition of working in public health - we helped to invent and define the field. It’s too bad that “Doc” either ignores the totality of Margaret’s educational background or doesn’t understand what it is that social workers do - help people and communities to meet their biological, social and psychological needs in the social environment. I think she’s aptly prepared to run DHSS.

Your comments about Margaret Donnelly’s qualifications for the Director of Health and Senior Services are short-sighted and wrong. Public Health consumers and the elderly are fortunate that Margaret is willing to devote her exceptional intelligence, creativity, and energy to this position. She has unparalleled knowledge of the relevant issues as reflected by her record as a state representative and attorney and social service advocate for the elderly and children. She has more than the requisite administrative skills for the position in light of her governance experience presiding over a large school district and serving on major institutional boards. There is not a legal requirement for the background you cite, but rather a compelling need for the exceptional qualities Margaret will bring to this important position.

Margaret Donnelly’s record as an outspoken state representative and lifetime advocate for the elderly and children more than qualifies her for this position. Add to that her budget experience, integrity and tenacity; clearly, she is more than qualified for this position. Missouri needs a champion for health and senior services - Missouri needs Margaret Donnelly.

One of Margaret Donnelly greatest strengths is the ability to understand complex information and the capacity to reach out to others who can assist her in her understanding of any issue.
Governor-Elect Nixon selected Donnelly because she is an intelligent and caring individual. There are many aspects of the Department of Health and Senior Services that your editorial fails to mention. This is not an academic position,but an administrative policy making position.
I feel confident that Donnelly has the skills, networking abilities, and passion for health to do whatever it takes to get the job done. The Platform is short-sighted and lacks vision in its comments. I hope you are big enough to withhold judgment until the product is produced.

Margaret Donnelly is an excellent choice to head up Health and Senior Services (although she would have been equally competent to oversee Social Services). For the past four years I have observed Donnelly up close, and she was one of the hardest working people in the Missouri House of Representatives. Her work on the appropriation and budget committees related to health issues is excellent preparation to direct DHSS. Health care for those with low incomes may not equal public health, but making sure uninsured and underserved populations get high quality health care certainly is one part of public health. (And whether that happens impacts on all of us - both our health and the cost of our health care.)

Most of all I rejoice that DHSS may again be a professional organization that relies on science and evidence-based information in doing its work. The quality of DHSS deteriorated during Gov. Blunt’s time in office, and by this past year, it took days to get answers to my questions, even as a state representative. It appeared to me that everything had to go through the governor’s political spin machine instead of just going to a professional staff member with expertise on the appropriate topic. (In early 2005, my first year in office, I actually could get a prompt and professional answer to my questions, but it was all downhill from there.) Margaret Donnelly has the integrity and commitment to good government to make sure that DHSS truly serves Missouri’s health and the needs of our senior citizens.