It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Politician personal issues and our right to know

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 10:12 AM
With the Foley case being only the most recent of an ongoing litany of similar revelations I want to pose the community a question. What are our rights as the citizenry of the US regarding serious personal issues of our elected officials? Clearly, a pedophile isn't going to identify his/herself but what about addictions? Do we have a right to know --- before we elect a person --- whether or not that individual has an addiction problem: drugs, alcohol, etc.?

It isn't a matter of personal privacy. These people are making significant decisions regarding our lives and future. Addictions significantly interfere with people's ability to engage in rational and appropriate decision making. Addictions can compromise people's integrity and can serve to open-up dangerous vulnerabilities. Foley's immediate entry into a rehab facility seems to suggest that his pedophilic behavior was somehow linked to alcoholism.

Would you be ok with your airline pilot being an alcoholic? Your doctor? Your kids' teachers? Do politicians owe us disclosure in this regard? What do you think? Is it time for our elected officials to be subjected to random drug/alcohol testing?

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 10:52 AM
I think we have a right to know everything about the people who we elect to also help us make the best decisions when electing them. After all, these officials determine how our tax dollars will be spent (hopefully wisely) and vote to decide if we should go to war (moral issue's), you would definitely want somebody who is thinking clearly and with the countries morals to make these decisions for us.

Another thing I think should be public knowledge is their personal business dealings, and what lobbyist groups have contributed to them, mainly because I think these would have an impact on how they vote on certain issues and should bar them from being on certain council's. Maybe all this is disclosed somewhere, but I haven't seen this info. anywhere yet.

I also think it would be a good idea to put this sort of info in the voters booth next to the candidates name as a short biography of the candidate's personal business interests. Most voters don't have the time (or the willpower) to investigate all the candidates and this would help them to make a better decision as to what candidate would best represent them best.

For example, a candidate that has business dealings with a defense contractor and/or is being lobbied by other defense contractors should not be on the security council in my book. That is a conflict of interests!

[edit on 4/10/06 by Keyhole]

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 11:05 AM
Alcoholism is rampant in Washington DC. I think there should definitely be drug/alcohol testing for anyone running for office and their aids as well. They made the drug testing laws, they should be subject to them as well.

posted on Oct, 4 2006 @ 09:33 PM
I read this thread with some interest and at first agreed that there should be drug testing.

But then reality set in and I realized they would just cheat, lie and steal to get clean results. And, I want less government involvement with ALL of our lives.

Until we can elect better people, we are doomed to live with what Washington DC has become. Or what we are finally realizing it has been for a long time

Both parties stink to high heaven.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 07:32 AM
I hear you DTOM. But don't we deserve to know whether a person running for public office has an addiction problem? Despite all the election dirt-digging that goes on invading the candidates' personal business, I believe the electorate has a right to know some basic things: Has the candidate ever been quilty of or are they currently charged with or under investigation for a crime and if so what is/was the crime? And, we should have the right to know if said candidate has an addiction issue (drugs or alcohol). Either of these two points, IMHO, clearly determine a candidate's ability to reasonably discharge their duties.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 07:46 AM
hey - they can make cars that wont start if you test positive for alcohol when you blow into the built in device so why cant they have built in testers at the entrance to the office?

its a fact that it only takes a small amount of alcohol to impair a persons judgement, yet these people are running the country... would you let a drunk surgeon operate on you or a known sexual predator near your kids? no you wouldnt so why would you allow politicians to get away with it on a daily basis? isnt it time we started holding them accountable for their actions?

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 08:23 AM
How can you fight a political system that is so corrupted.

This people are making our laws, taking decisions for us and keeping secrets from us.

They dictate how to interpret law and how it should apply.

This people run our nation.

So how can you fix a problem when they are in charge

We already know how elections are fix, how many of these people in congress have sits that seems to last a life time their life time.

We are powerless because voting for the same old same will do nothing to fix it.

They will make more laws to go around their dirty corrupted leadership to keep it.

This what our nation has become, they know it, is coming out in the light, and they hold the power to control the population.

And . . . it includes both elite parties in power

They both has been in charge for way to long to let go to their dirty corrupted political system.

posted on Oct, 5 2006 @ 11:32 AM
By one token, it is their personal lives and none of our business. But on the other side if you are a public figure, you should be prepared for certain personal pieces of info to be released. Its the way it works. I personally dont care what they do in their personal time/lives. But thats just me.

new topics

top topics


log in