Respectfully, I couldn't disagree with you more - a unitary executive is a GREAT idea because government hides behind the "division" of power. Even from a legal perspective, what do you think a court is more likely to do: regulate an "independent" agency or a "political" agency? To put it another way, what can do more damage: an "independent" CDC run by experts or a "political" CDC run by hacks? The enemies of freedom created "independent" agencies to create a power base that was FREE from democratic control - do you think they were wrong about that? Do you think that "independent" agencies are better, more responsive?

If you want to limit the government (a worthy goal), you first need to strip it of its perceived legitimacy. Nobody would have deferred to Trump's appointees, but everybody deferred to "experts." Strip them of that pretense.

Those who love sausages & laws shouldn't know how either are made; FORCE PEOPLE TO SEE HOW CDC RECOMMENDATIONS ARE MADE & THEY WON'T FOLLOW THEM.

To me, that's obvious economics & commonsense.