With confirmation hearings for Surgeon General nominee Casey Means expected to spark controversy, a new Cato Institute policy analysis questions the very necessity of the office itself.
In “Unnecessary Relics: The Surgeon General and the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps,” authors Dr. Jeffrey Singer, Michael F. Cannon, Akiva Malamet, and Bautista Vivanco examine the surprising evolution—and overreach—of the Surgeon General and the Public Health Service Commissioned Corps.
“With the eventual Surgeon General confirmation hearings sure to stir heated and divisive arguments, it would serve the public well if Congress were to ask, ‘Why does the United States have a Surgeon General?’ and ‘Does the country even need one?’” writes Singer.
The report traces the evolution of the Surgeon General from a modest administrative role in 1798 to a politicized platform promoting expansive regulations on issues far beyond infectious disease control. The authors conclude that both the office and its 6,000-member Commissioned Corps should be eliminated, with essential functions reassigned to other agencies.
Read the full policy analysis: https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/unnecessary-relics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.