A Question of Foresight

By now you have probably heard about the questionnaire that the Obama team has put together. Anyone wanting to work in his new administration is expected to complete all 63 questions and provide all requested information. It is totally outrageous especially for the party that supposedly is against the more intrusive Patriot Act laws.

When this questionnaire first surfaced, everyone zeroed in on question 61 – “Have you had any association with any person, group or business venture that could be used – even unfairly – to impugn or attack your character and qualification for government service? " Gee, can you say Bill Ayers? Just a bit hypocritical, don’t you think? And what about Whitewater? Somehow I doubt if Hillary will have to fill this out if she wants to be Secretary of State.

Actually I can picture these young lawyers and politicians sitting around and coming up with these questions. They are thinking that they want to avoid any of the pitfalls of past administrations by doing a comprehensive vetting on their own. Think about it. Does Obama strike you as the sort of man who would tolerate it if somebody embarrassed him, especially in the first few months of his presidency? I don’t think so, either.

Some of the questions are legitimate and should be asked. The typical ones about where you worked, what you did, who you worked with are all normal for any job. I remember the “Nanny Gate” so questions about Domestic Help are now de rigueur as are most of the financial questions but they take it too far. The four questions in the Domestic Help section are fine but the Financial Information section contains Questions 21 – 32 and then is followed by an entire Tax Information section with Questions 33 – 41. A little overkill, yes? Imagine trying to complete Question 32 – “Other than from relatives, or close and longstanding personal friends on occasions such as birthdays or seasonal holidays, have you or your spouse ever received a gift exceeding $50.00 in value? Please identify the donor, the value of the gift, the date received and the circumstances in which the gift was made.”

Many of the questions make me think that the authors of this questionnaire were young. Not because of the inexperience shown in coming up with the questions but because they didn’t take into consideration people who have been working for 25 or 30 years. There are too many questions where they ask questions about “have you ever” as in the above Question 32. Another example is Question 12 – "Speeches: Please identify all speeches you have given. If available please provide the text or recordings of each speech or identify any recordings of speeches of which you are aware of." Forgetting for a moment the obvious first thought of Obama’s San Francisco “bitter people” speech, my second thought is who can remember all of the speeches? Even in my own career, I couldn’t begin to remember all of the speeches I have given. Perhaps it is easy to answer if you are 32 but when you are 52 or even 62? “Ever” is a long time for some of us to remember this stuff…

Then there are the truly outrageous questions. Here are just a few of them:
#8 – Briefly describe the most controversial matters you have been involved with during the course of your career.

#13 Electronic communications – If you have even sent an electronic communication, including but not limited to an email, text message or instant message, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect, please describe.

#14 Diaries – If you keep or have ever kept a diary that contains anything that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the President-Elect, please describe.

Gee, see a trend? As I said in the beginning, I don’t think that Obama would be happy if anybody ever embarrassed him in any way. So let’s just ignore all those pesky laws about privacy and freedoms and really interrogate anyone who wants to be a part of his team. As for being hypocritical? It doesn’t matter, because as they see it, they are the winners and now they are the ones making the rules, except there are two potentially fatal flaws….

As everyone ridicules these questions they seem to be missing the obvious. Who is going to take the time to read all the completed questionnaires and attachments? Just filling out all the financial information with accompanying tax returns and quarterly statements will take pages and pages and require a tax expert to review. Then in addition to asking for copies of Diaries, Electronic statements and speeches, there is my favorite question, Question 10 – "Writings: Please list, and if readily available, provide a copy of each book, article, column or publication (including but not limited to any posts or comments on blogs or other websites) you have authored, individually or with others. Please list all aliases or “handles” you have used to communicate on the Internet.”

Putting aside the issue that this question just seems so wrong, who is going to read all the stuff that would be applicants send them? Many of the men and women wanting to be a part of this new administration are prolific writers with regular columns or blogs and even numerous lengthy books, all of which will start to pile up as they are sent in with the questionnaires.

This brings me to the final problem. I can envision a few years down the road when a scandal breaks out about someone in the Obama administration. (And let’s face it, there always are scandals.) Except in this case, when Obama tries to disown the person, the accused will point to Question XX and say they had told then about this problem. But in all the paperwork that inundated the team Obama’s people somehow missed this. Instead of pleading ignorance, as all previous administrations could do, the Obama team will have no excuse. So the lesson is, if you are going to ask everyone to fill out this questionnaire and send in all this material, Obama’s team better have somebody read it all or it might come back and bite them someday.