> Isn't your impulse to damn now that there's a low-level face to the faceless evil the exact same impulse as the one people have to condemn a low-level drug ru

> Isn't your impulse to damn now that there's a low-level face to the faceless evil the exact same impulse as the one people have to condemn a low-level drug runner for the rest of their life? First, there’s a disconnect here in my opinion: the low level drug offender deals with headwinds entering professional society writ large, not specific industry. This is much more consequential and, in my opinion, unfair. Being a drug runner doesn’t imply you would be a bad sales rep, but that’s how our society operates. If we were considering that low-level drug dealers face a specific impediment to becoming public health officials, I would argue that’s at least more sensible. Both the drug dealer and this guy have probably caused outsized social health impacts (and, don’t forget, deaths) through their actions. That invites scrutiny. Second, I have no delusions. Yes, I think this guy should be heavily scrutinized. Perhaps it’s not exactly fair that your actions follow you for your life, but if you have a hand in one of the worst public health crises of recent years, that’s damning if you want to run a public health office. Civil servants necessarily should be held to a higher standard. All that said, I doubt he will be disqualified from the office. There’s a wider question: what are we prioritizing? Individual fairness or public health (more generally, public good)? I think from that frame (and a similar framing in many industries) more people should be made an example of if they have worked against the interests of an office they seek. Airline lobbyists should not be heads of transportation (and heads should be legally disallowed from entering lobbying for a period after office), food magnates who seek to dilute and adulterate their products as much as legally allowable should not run the USDA, the parallels are numerous. These people hold the wrong incentive (making money) highest. By making examples of these people and disqualifying them, you right the scale to some degree and influence the actions of others. I don’t have the time at the moment to make a wider argument of systems, but if you look at China vs. the US…