Print This Post Print This Post

Dec

13

Husted trusts blogs to be adequate background check for legislative candidates


So writes Jim Siegel in The Daily Briefing:

Senate Republicans on Tuesday quickly brushed aside an amendment by Sen. John Boccieri, D-New Middletown, that would have required legislative candidates to submit to criminal background checks. So what does Speaker Jon Husted think about the idea?
“We put them all through one,” the Kettering Republican said. “I promise you we do as good of a criminal background check as anybody in the FBI, and more, believe me.”

After a pause, he also added: “We have blogs. Isn’t that good enough?”

I’m speechless. And humbled. Jon Husted has just referred to blogs as being as good as or better than the FBI.

Of course, the FBI ain’t what it used to be…

For the record, make the damn checks required – just figure out what the consequences should be. That’s the only part that really matters.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:22 pm December 13th, 2007 in Blogging, Government, Statehouse 

Comments

20 Responses to “Husted trusts blogs to be adequate background check for legislative candidates”

  1. 1 David Miller on December 14th, 2007 8:18 am

    I’ve confessed some things on my blogs, but misdemeanors or where I hid those bodies – I don’t publish those online. What do legislators have to fear? Won’t we love them better once their dirty laundry has been aired?

  2. 2 Jill Miller Zimon on December 14th, 2007 8:29 am

    David – I agree. That’s partly why Obama and the drug stuff implicated by the now former Clinton staffer really impacts her more than him. Some might argue that that’s not the case, but we are getting to if not already past the tipping point where these indiscretions, esp. when done years ago, matter much.

    I’ve written before about how law enforcement recruiters say they are suffering because pretty much everyone born after 1980 has either bad debt, drug activity or some other misdemeanor that keeps them from being recruited. As people change in how we view things and make choices, we have to stop applying a double-standard.

    And then, of course, there IS the whole question of what are they hiding. – See – it’s not really that question as much as a fear the Husted and others must have about what WE the VOTERS will THINK when we hear about their indiscretions. They think we’ll be as harsh as they legislate, when in fact, we may be far more forgiving.

    Anyway – it’s a bad move no matter how you look at it. Looks like they are hiding, elite, preferential, afraid – not a single good thing about it.

    To not make legislators subject to the same background checks as every other of the thousands of people who get all kinds of licenses is really crazy. Now – some of them already have been through some checks – like the lawyers. But that is by no means a system without loopholes either.

  3. 3 Jeff Hess on December 14th, 2007 10:28 am

    Shalom Jill,

    I don’t want one penny of tax money spent on background checks for any elected official. If the candidate’s opponents, or the media in all its permutations, don’t uncover a criminal history, then the public doesn’t deserve to know.

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  4. 4 Jill Miller Zimon on December 14th, 2007 10:36 am

    Jeff – At first I was going to write that I completely see your point.

    HOWEVER – don’t we end up “paying” for it one way or the other? It’s when we give money to candidates or groups that will do that vetting and then turn it into some negative ad. And if you say, well, I don’t give, there is still the media picking and choosing who it follows – we’ve seen examples where the blogs pick up stuff that the media doesn’t get, find or look for.

    I don’t know Jeff – maybe instead of giving themselves raises, they need to put money into this kind of thing. I don’t know that I like the “market” idea of vetting – it’s just as much out of our hands, you know?

  5. 5 Jeff Hess on December 14th, 2007 5:50 pm

    Shabbat shalom Jill,

    If we as voters aren’t holding media’s feet to the fire, demanding that they get out and do their feckin’ jobs, then we get the coverage we deserve.

    Sen. Larry Wide-Stance Craig (R-Idaho) was nailed by a newspaper that just wouldn’t quit. We need more journalists like that.

    But I think opposition research has become a fine art, and if campaigns aren’t willing to go negative on a candidate, then there are bloggers who will gleefully take the parking-garage tip and run with it.

    If we’re letting felons become Senators, then that’s our fault. A further government program, funded by tax dollars, is not the answer.

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  6. 6 MY COMMENTS… on December 14th, 2007 5:52 pm

    [...] 1750 Husted trusts blogs to be adequate background check… [...]

  7. 7 Jill Miller Zimon on December 14th, 2007 5:55 pm

    I guess I don’t see this as only a further gov’t program funded by tax dollars – even though I am opposed to creating unnecessary gov’t entities and responsibilities.

    I guess I just don’t trust all of journalism to be doing the right thing for the right reasons and I definitely don’t trust all campaign pushers.

    I see a reliability issue here, Jeff and the sources from which we now hear about this stuff – you think they’re better and preferable to any other system?

    What would you like it to look like – vetting a candidate – if you could design it? ;)

  8. 8 Jeff Hess on December 14th, 2007 6:02 pm

    Shabbat Shalom Jill,

    I like the way it works now.

    Just how many felons do we have in office at present?

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  9. 9 Jill Miller Zimon on December 14th, 2007 6:05 pm

    If we’re only excluding felons from elected office, is that enough? (just asking – I’ve never really thought about it)

  10. 10 Jeff Hess on December 15th, 2007 11:27 am

    Shalom Jill,

    Where would you draw the line then?

    1st degree misdemeanors? 2nd? 3rd?

    Pushing Sally in the milk line in 4th grade?

    What serving politicians do think have criminal records we don’t know about?

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  11. 11 MY COMMENTS… on December 15th, 2007 11:31 am

    [...] Husted trusts blogs to be adequate background check… digg_url=”http://havecoffeewillwrite.com/?p=5944″; digg_skin = [...]

  12. 12 Jill Miller Zimon on December 15th, 2007 11:45 am

    I’m not really asking about it in that way. It’s more about – what would bother me if I knew it about a person that would make me feel that he or she really should not be in the position of making legislative decisions?

  13. 13 Dorothy Stahlnecker on December 16th, 2007 11:48 am

    I recently had a background check as a result of Casino work I was doing. I see nothing wrong with sharing my background when necessary.
    Your history is a great barometer for what we might expect of you when in office. Especially when you are running as a presidential candidate, I want to know as much about you as I can. I realize it hasn’t had much of an impact before, however, things are readily changing. Women are more involved today and who knows where that will take us?

    Dorothy from grammology
    remember to call gram

  14. 14 Jill Miller Zimon on December 16th, 2007 11:52 am

    Well hello, Dorothy! Thanks for reading and commenting. I need to check to make sure you’re in my RSS feed reader – I don’t recall seeing your blog in there lately. :(

    I agree with you completely. I would say the one caveat revolves around trust: trust that people won’t overblow indiscretions, depending on the circumstances. There’s a reason we are mortal and saying that “we’re only human” means that we make mistakes. But we need to follow that belief too and figure out which mistakes matter and what behavior following the mistakes should look like.

    I hope you’re having a great holiday season Dorothy and thanks again for chiming in. :)

  15. 15 Jeff Hess on December 17th, 2007 8:35 am

    Shalom Jill,

    Whoa!

    If that’s what you’re asking, then I’m even more against tax dollars paying for it.

    What you’re asking for would go even deeper than the FBI background check I had in 1975 as part of my security clearance to work with nuclear weapons.

    It’s more about – what would bother me if I knew it about a person that would make me feel that he or she really should not be in the position of making legislative decisions?

    What could that be? A subscription to Guns & Ammo? A habit of frequenting strip clubs? A grandfather censored by the Joseph McCarthy?
    A brother-in-law arrested for DUI?

    Once you start such a list there is no end of events and associations that are guaranteed to bother at least some people.

    Don’t open that door.

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  16. 16 MY COMMENTS… on December 17th, 2007 8:38 am

    [...] Husted trusts blogs to be adequate background check… digg_url=”http://havecoffeewillwrite.com/?p=5966″; digg_skin = [...]

  17. 17 Jill Miller Zimon on December 17th, 2007 8:51 am

    No, no, no, Jeff – that’s not what I mean.

    Things like whether someone’s committed a felony or not are decided by laws you and I never really made. We abide by them because we live in a democracy with certain systems that provide for what we’re supposed to all support, but of course we don’t all agree.

    No – I mean, think about the things in the past, in regard to any candidate for anything – job or elected office or spouse – and what were the dealbreakers for you?

    Those are the things I’d be more interested in knowing.

    I’m surprised you would write this:

    “What could that be? A subscription to Guns & Ammo? A habit of frequenting strip clubs? A grandfather censored by the Joseph McCarthy?
    A brother-in-law arrested for DUI?”

    None of those things would concern me or be anywhere in my imagination about people. No – I have to think specifically, but it’s easier probably to say what wouldn’t influence me than what would.

    Hypocrisy. Does the person have a habit of being hypocritical? That would be important to me to consider.

    Making promises they don’t keep. That’s a problem.

    Overblowing expectations – which is connected to making promises they can’t keep.

    Making promises that have no meaning – like saying we will win a war on terror. That’s never going to happen unless people decide that they can live with a certain amount of terror and it’s been reduced to that amount – but even then, I’m not really sure.

    Anyway – I hope that’s more helpful. No – those concrete things you were saying – that’s not at all what I have/had in mind. Sorry to give you the wrong impression.

    I got FBI clearance too in the 1980s to work at DOJ and attend some private dinner party with some Dems I don’t even remember!

  18. 18 Jeff Hess on December 17th, 2007 10:27 am

    Shalom Jill,

    That makes much more sense.

    What I understand you to be asking then is this: is the candidate of good character?

    Back ground checks won’t reveal that. Probing journalism will.

    I remember years ago Mike Royko presented three questions for candidates. I can’t recall all three (and a cursory check on the web didn’t turn up the article, maybe John Ettorre will recall the piece), but one was:

    You are in a remote town in Montana, it is late at night, the weather is clear and there’s not another car on the 55 mph highway. You have 60 minutes to get to your next appearance 60 miles away.

    Will you be late.

    That’s a character question.

    B’shalom,

    Jeff

  19. 19 Jill Miller Zimon on December 17th, 2007 11:07 am

    Sure, character is part of it and I do believe that some things that a background check might turn up, depending on the checklist, could be useful. But, in debating this here, I can see why you say that vetting through campaigning might be as or more effective. I’m not really sure I guess as to how we get at these things – but Meet the Bloggers sure goes a long way for me.

  20. 20 What the Plain Dealer left out when pointing finger at blogs | Writes Like She Talks on December 25th, 2007 8:57 am

    [...] folks, Ohio Speaker of the House Jon Husted (R-Kettering) doesn’t support background checks for Ohio&…. Jeff Hess argues in the comments here that it’s only through campaigning that we should be [...]

Leave a Reply




"));