By Lance Simmens
For the uninitiated, the grand majority of individuals who have never had the privilege of being vetted while seeking a federal government senior-level appointed position, it is important to have access to secret information that could be usedagainst the nation and the governmental infrastructure that supports it. According to the organization Americans ForTax Fairness, “President-Elect Donald Trump, a billionaire himself, is stocking his new administration with an extraordinary number of billionaires and multimillionaires who bring a slew of potential conflicts of interest to their jobs. These appointees have a clear incentive to pursue economic policies that further enrich themselves, their rich friends and especially their boss. The question is whether the needs of hard-working families will get any attention in the incoming administration’s policy-making process … that amounts to over $313 billion.”
So why in the world does the Trump Administration reject and try to abandon the carefully laid out vetting protocols that are used to ensure that potential appointees who are essentially the guardians of our nation and economy? What is it that they are trying to hide? Why is their reluctance to practice an open-door policy on the veracity of this protected class of individuals?
I will never forget the anxiousness I felt when I was vetted for a top-secret security clearance when I was hired by the U.S. Senate Budget Committee in 1981, particularly when I was apprised that the FBI was snooping around my old college haunts and questioning my character before folks who I had already forgotten. I will never forget when I was summoned to the District of Columbia Navy Yard by the Defense Intelligence Agency to what would be a three-hour grilling that involved marijuana use and my careful dancing around the issue until finally caving in. I got the clearance anyway but sweated out a couple of weeks.
Today, we are witnessing a rather forceful rejection by the incoming administration to a need for the vetting process that already has achieved casualty to a former congressman who has been pressured to quit his job and pull back his appointment. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. Several other appointees have been thrown into the stew that, by all indications, are of highly questionable character, and there is tricky maneuverability under discussion to derive ways to appoint without Senate confirmation. To what great lengths will those representing the Trump Administration go to get their fealty solidified as true believers in the individual who himself is a convicted felon?
Matt Gaetz’s failure to measure up to the attorney general position has clearly shown how important the vetting process is, strong enough to knock out those who attempt to circumvent the scrutiny of a detailed investigation. But there are others who raise substantial questions about their veracity. Peter Hegseth, picked to be secretary of defense, is having to address an allegation of sexual assault. One would not be blindsided to the Republican legislators who will have to pick whether they wish to turn the other cheek or muster the courage to deny his appointment.
And then there is Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman, who has been picked to be the Director Of National Intelligence, who in 2017 met with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad and her pro-Russian and pro-Putin rhetoric in 2015 where she stated “Al-Qaeda attacked us on 9/11 and must be defeated. Obama won’t bomb them in Syria. Putin did. #neverforget911.”
Then there is Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chosen as an appointee for Secretary of Health and Human Services where, despite having absolutely no medical qualifications, he would have broad authority over U.S. federal health agencies — including those that oversee approval of vaccines and pharmaceuticals. There has been speculation about his inability to pass a background check for security clearance due to past controversies, including dumping a bear carcass in New York’sCentral Park.
In 2018, Penelope Hegseth wrote her son an email in which she laid into him for poor behavior and disrespect toward women. “On behalf of all the women (and I know it’s many) you have abused in some way, I say … get some help and take an honest look at yourself …,” she said.
The vetting process would have surely caught these issues. The Trump Administration was reportedly “blindsided” by these details, but one sure-fire way not to be thrown off guard is to have in place an operational and effective vetting process.
There are five essential priorities for addressing the vetting process, according to a “Primer for Navigating the Presidential Appointee Vetting and Confirmation Process,” according to the esteemed Covington & Burling LLP legal firm that address the nearly quarter of the 4,000 positions filled by presidential appointment and require Senate confirmation: Tax Issues; Ethics and Financial Disclosure Requirements; Legal Proceedings, Investigations, and Drug Use; Publications and Organizational Affiliations; and Medical, Family, and Personal Issues.
The vetting process more than adequately deals with creating the type of atmosphere that is essential to accommodating the hiring of quality individuals to manage our national government. It is in current operation and comports with the issue of satisfying both political and policy needs. To deny its usefulness by forgoing the imperative to satisfy the needs of the people would be dangerous. The Republican Party is in control of the House, the Senate, the Executive Office and the Supreme Court, hence rendering the ultimate responsibility to protect the will of the people and their faith in and respect for their government and the institutions that affect their everyday lives. To ignore or circumvent such an important and necessary check and balance represents neglect of the highest order.
