You are missing the deeper question my little story illustrates: Who else do you want to do the job?

Crying "cronyism" is a cop out. Because what IS cronyism? That you know someone who is good at their job? That you consult with them and ask them for input when you need to make a decision in their area of expertise? That you vote for the guy when he runs for office because you know he has a good understanding of the industry?

"Cronyism" is an easy epithet thrown from people who are not in the room. Why aren't they in the room, taking part in the conversation?

Because they aren't qualified to be. Either through lack of knowledge, lack of professionalism, or lack of access (because of the previous two deficiencies).

No Wall Street banker is going to invite a megaphone-wielding, hoodie-wearing #Occupy protester to to the table to join in the discussion because they are not equipped to handle the conversation at that level. So the protester cries "Cronyism!" and goes out and gets another facial piercing.

I used to live in countries where bribes were common.

And ya know what? Bribes work when the system doesn't.

Here in the US your permit gets denied for some esoteric detail. The mysterious machinations of the people behind the doors do their voodoo, and you are denied. (Just ask KB.)

In Eastern Europe you just pay the guy another $50, and it is taken care of right there. No questions asked. Quick and easy. And ya know what? Nobody cares, because they know the system is fucked and overly complex and stupid.

I understand you don't want it to be this way. I get that. I really do. But think about it practically... what other possible outcome is there? Politicians get their information from the sources that are available to them, and those sources are largely their "cronies", who, in any other context, would be called their "circle of friends."

Should those circles expand? Absolutely. Should they include scientists and academics? Absolutely. But who is paying the scientist or academic to sit outside the Senator's office and meet with them? Imagine if a scientist applied for funding for their project, and the second largest line item on the Projected Expenses page was "Lobbying". What's the first line that gets cut, when the budget isn't approved? Double-blind testing? Researcher salaries? Lab equipment? Heh. Right.

I'm not denying your base position that this is not an ideal way to run our system. But it is the reality of it, and railing against that is pointless. This is a system that can only be changed from the inside, over extraordinarily long time-scales.