Posted on 01/08/2009 6:05:11 AM PST by Badeye
Lessons From McCain's Palin Background Check By Sean Leviashvili
Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, is five months pregnant, plans to keep the baby and marry the child’s 18-year-old father.
We know all that now, the question is, did John McCain know it before he chose Palin to run as his VP?
That information may have come up in a background check, and the thoroughness of McCain's is being questioned. And what he did, or did not do, before announcing his running mate, holds lessons for any professional, according to career experts. Some may argue that picking a running mate is similar to hiring an employee. How should the background checks compare?
As for the legal guidelines regarding background checks for employers, like most areas of law, they vary based on location. For example, in Kentucky, no consumer reporting agency, which is an investigative agency that falls under the guidelines of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, can maintain any information relating to any charge in a criminal case unless the charge has resulted in a conviction. Meanwhile a consumer reporting agency in Montana, Kansas and New Hampshire can maintain information regarding records of arrests and indictments, with or without convictions, for seven years, according to www.hrliability.com.
And criminal history is just one area employers can delve into. Other areas include credit reports, driving records, references, school records, and others. But what areas are off limits? Can a potential employer pry into a possible employee’s personal life on a job interview?
Again, the answer is unclear. “There is no comprehensive law that says it is inappropriate,” says Pauline Kim, law professor at the Washington University school of law in St. Louis. “Very often there are protections and laws that protect medical information more generally, but not specifically a person’s privacy.”
When it comes to asking about a person’s family before making a hiring offer, it is usually acceptable, she says. “Unless it’s put off limits by a particular law, information about a person’s family that could be known by members of the community is not prohibited.”
On a national level, some legislation limits the extent of job interview questions. For example Title VII, makes it illegal for employers to ask about religion, race, or national origin as part of a hiring decision. (However, the information can be obtained if a potential employee consents in a release form.)
The extent of the background check usually coincides with how closely a potential employee will be connected with the government, says Stephen Brown, founder of HindSight Services, inc., and author of the second edition of The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Private Investigating. Employers seeking workers for government agencies will pull information from databases like the Office of Foreign Assets Control Specially Designated National and Blocked Persons database, or the Department of State Trade Control Debarred Parties. But for the everyday worker, most employers won’t spend the money on extensive background checks.
A cheaper alternative are online background checks, but these sources generally don’t meet the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act in that they have a more limited coverage. “The information must be current within thirty days, and should cover a range of counties,” says Brown.
Also, these files won’t disclose information about a potential employer’s family of personal life. But, to bring it back to the McCain camp, should it?
Family members could be an indication of a person’s ability, but it is often out of the employer’s league to make that judgment. “When you’re hiring someone, you’re hiring them, not their family,” says Brown.
One piece of legislation that further separates candidates from their family trees is the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008, which was signed in May. The act works to protect Americans against discrimination based on their genetic information when it comes to health insurance and employment.
“With this act, medical information is becoming more private,” says Kim, associate dean for research and development at Washington University Law School. “But as for an employee’s child’s pregnancy, that is not off limits.”
True.
Agreed. The reaction of some liberals to the Cross is similar to Dracula’s.
I will admit that I was shaky on W in '00. It was Cheney who clinched it for me. Gotta respect a professional. Celebrities as candidates only work with MSM approval, since they are the ones who create them in the first place.
They knew about it all along. Many in the MSM did as well.
The fact the MSM was willing to overlook another Bill Clinton scumbag philanderer is quite revealing.
Same here, although at the time being a twice elected Govenor of Texas, and the fact he (Bush) forced that gasbag Anne “Who’s bring the cocaine?” Richards to the dust bin of history were positives for me.
That was so good, it was worth repeating. Excellent.
The lesson here is for Sarah Palin: You’re a first stringer who tried to play second fiddle to a third stringer. Next time, be the starter.
That was so good, it was worth repeating. Excellent.
Yes, it is ‘that’ good.
Not true, he, the 0ne checket himself and found he had no contakt with himslef and that his berth cifikat is in order. Nothing to sea, moove along forks!
The NY Times and they loved him - against their real love.
The NY Times and they loved him.
I agree.
How is this in any way relevant? Breaking news! The election is over and Obama is poised to move into the White House.
Fair point about it being ‘breaking news’. My error. I rarely post articles here at FR...primarily because the articles I would post are already ‘up’ in the forum.
That said, it was my intent to remind everybody that checking the backgrounds of every nominee for every office is a ‘must’ for every election in the future.
I see.
I agree with everyone that Palin is great. I take the point that the liberals hate her because she & her daughter show that abortion isn’t necessary. BUT — though I understand that the democrats don’t have the right to cast any stones, I don’t understand why, given the values that conservatives are supposed to hold dear, Palin’s daughter didn’t quietly marry the father of her child as soon as she knew she was pregnant. Wouldn’t it have been better NOT to have her personal life as a topic of discussion? Why didn’t she get married? Did she enjoy being mocked and derided in media throughout the world? I think single motherhood is a terrible example to show the world — when you’re in public life, appearances do count, and they count twice as much for our side. To me, Bristol has seemed willful and disrespectful of her mother’s mission. And Palin comes off looking as if she can’t control her own daughter. And why aren’t the kids married yet? What are they waiting for? A big vulgar extravaganza with their child as the ring boy?
I am sick to death of this constant bashing of Sarah Palin, and I like her very much. I would gladly vote for her in 2012.
Absolutely. The 'background' of any candidate, other than his intrinsic qualification for the office, is entirely subjective. Even the basic qualifications can be overlooked (obama) if the 'cause' is important enough. I believe that the democrat party decides what is important and what isn't regarding the background of any national cadidate, in either party. The MSM, as their propaganda arm then tells the public. Selective prioritization, Travolta vs. Gaza, stuff like that. Mass ignorance is their friend, so they reinforce it and spread it worldwide.
Bill Ayers.Who did the background check of THE ONE?
Exactly.
A big vulgar extravaganza?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.