Every week in the U.S., there seems to be at least one story about a legislator entering into shady backroom dealings with corporate donors, texting underage pages, canoodling in men's rooms, or getting outrageously drunk and peeing off balconies. It is enough to make us all want to impose new standards upon our public representatives, or at the very least, make them pass a few tests.
The people of Australia may soon beat us to the punch, as their most populous state continues to push for a new law requiring legislators to take breathalyzers prior to voting on legislation.
"Honestly, if you are going to have breathalyzers for people driving
cranes you should have breathalyzers for people writing laws," one legislator
told the Daily Telegraph, which has been running headlines about the policy idea.
The legislation call was prompted after a male member of the Australian Parliament shoved a female colleague during a late-night vote. The legislator had just come from an early Christmas party and was suspected of being drunk.
Although a bit rudimentary for the behavior of our legislators, perhaps there is something to be said for providing a certification or two as to the mental states of our representatives. Aside from media vetting, which is unreliable at best, biased and inaccurate at the worst, we really don't require any standards for those we elect.
Perhaps the time has come impose the will of the people, and call for those we send to office to first be screened for criminal records, mental instability, financial solvency, and histories of drug and alcohol abuse (or peeing off balconies) before putting them in power officially. After all, the same standards are applied to those seeking government security clearances and political appointments. Should legislators be treated differently?
Also Interesting: