A question about DoD clearances, politics and candidates.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

Yankee White: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yankee_White
...is an administrative nickname for a background check undertaken in the United States of America for Department of Defense personnel and contractor employees working with the president and vice president. Obtaining such clearance requires, in part, a Single Scope Background Investigation (SSBI) which is conducted under the manuals of the U.S. Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency.

Individuals with Yankee White clearance undergo extensive background investigation. The Yankee White clearance includes requirements of U.S. citizenship and unquestionable loyalty to the United States.

Is it/should it be required of VP and Pres. candidate hopefuls to pass such an investigation before being accepted as candidates?

[ Looking at you 45. ]

[Effete Snob]

1. Okay, so, who do you want to put in charge...

Of deciding “who is allowed to be president?”

We go through this with folks wanting to put a psychiatrist in charge of deciding who can be president, and now some want some sort of background investigator in charge of deciding who can be president.

This is easy to understand - the moment we decide to put someone (or a group of someone’s) in charge of deciding who can be president, is the moment your vote no longer matters. Because from that moment on, the presidency is decided by that someone or group.

The idea is to avoid voting for insane and disloyal people.

If that doesn't make sense, then let's start from the ground up. Who is going to do this "background check" to decide who can be president? Do you want this to be some office in the Pentagon, say, the Defense Investigative Agency, so that someone in the current military decides who can run?

In other words, when Trump was President, would you have wanted him to be at the top of the chain of command over whomever runs the office that does the background checks to decide who is allowed to run against him in the next election?

Or, instead of a military or executive agency, do you want this to be done by a Congressionally-appointed committee of some kind? For example, would you have wanted the same people who ran umpteen Benghazi investigations hiring the people who are going to decide who can run for president?

It's just not a workable idea, and it stems from a feeling that we adopt as children, and which becomes hard to shake off later on - the idea that there are some "adults in charge" who have our collective best interests in mind. There simply aren't.

On top of that, there are people whose political beliefs are such that they don't think the government should have any secret information, and/or they believe that people who handle government information should be able to decide for themselves to publish it, leak it, or whatever. Certainly, folks like Edward Snowden, Chelsea Manning, Reality Winner are charter members of the "it's okay when we do it" club, and historically have had a lot of support here.

[Thomas Hurt]

2. There are already people in charge of deciding who can be President.

It is routinely said that the President is picked by corporate media, lobbyists, and deals in smoke filled rooms.

Money is free speech. Corporations and PACs pick the President.

The voters are manipulated the conspiracy theorists say. I don't buy into that myself but I think a lot of people do.

Your point is well taken though. Presidents should be elected by a free and open vote not reduced to a committee of doctors or the addition of requirements like background checks. Actually, that should be the press' gig.

[Effete Snob]

3. Well, that's just an excuse for disengagement

Candidates are selected by powerful interests. There's nothing we can do. Might as well stay home.

I think what we need to do is to get away from "celebrity candidate" with no prior record of substantial public service.

No corporate media or smoke filled room picked Joe Biden to run for the New Castle County Council. He got high marks for his service there and climbed the political ladder in Delaware from the bottom.

Certainly, there are powerful interests who prefer one candidate over another at the top level, but they are generally not fostering careers in public service which provide a record against which candidates words can be judged.

[Thomas Hurt]

4. It is for some people exactly.

IMO that is why we have so much voter apathy or at least it is a good excuse for voter apathy.

[Dysfunctional]

5. I guess it is harder to get a clearance now.

I enlisted in the army in May 1961. I received notification in August 1961 that I was cleared for Top Secret Cryptographic Access. Of course, I was straight out of high school so there wasn't much for the FBI to check. My neighbor told me later that an FBI agent asked her about me. She told him that I was a good boy and would not do anything wrong. He thanked her and left. I have a question, does every enlistee have to read a document that lists about 300 groups and swear that s/he has never belonged to any of them?