A case for vetting candidates for political office

I have always wondered why we don’t vet the people we nominate to be our “public servants.”

As an observer of our political scene, one could be forgiven for thinking that an unacceptable percentage of our politicians are venal scoundrels, grifters, pedophiles, corrupt, compromised influence peddlers who too often seem to forget the constituents they were elected to represent.

I truly believe that most of our elected representatives go to Washington D.C. with the best of intentions but many eventually get compromised by the “Swamp.”

A few Swamp control methods:

1. Leadership demands obedience (“be a team player if you expect support and funds for re-election, want committee positions, want to rise in the Party ranks, otherwise forget about your future in the party”)

2. Lobbyists’ offers of lucrative post-D.C. employment in exchange for votes on their pet projects.

3. Blackmail with threat of exposure of illicit behavior (think Epstein Island, pedophilia, influence-peddling, selling state secrets for money, etc.). Big donors often fund campaigns with expectation of full support for their issues. Our “Representatives” are basically owned by donors.

As a condition for being hired as an aerospace engineer in the 60’s, I was required to obtain a Security Clearance. This entailed filling out many forms detailing any membership in politically-oriented organizations (e.g. Communist Party, KKK, Black Dragon Society, German American Bund, ect.).

Additionally, the government agency responsible for issuing Security Clearance did extensive research into my background via interviews of friends, family, associates, past employment history, etc. The process took weeks to complete.

It strikes me as unfathomable that, for government positions of significantly more importance than mine, this level of scrutiny is not required/performed. To the best of my knowledge, no such investigation is required for candidates for President, Senator, Congressional Representative.

Voters would be well served with this minimal assurance that the candidates don’t have any obvious security, or character issues. Offhand, I can recall a couple of recent presidents who likely would not have withstood a serious security investigation.

Our fragile Democracy requires as much information as possible for its citizens to make informed decisions before voting on who is best qualified to govern our Country. We deserve no less.

Jeff Paley