Filtering Frauds, Freaks & Fascists: A Call for Aptitude Tests in Congress
The 118th Congress will make the term “kakistocracy” go viral
I am aware that we readers frown on the usage of esoteric words. But we can expect a nearly 400-year-old term to go viral in 2023 — thanks to the Republican majority in the House of Representatives.
As defined by Wikipedia, a “kakistocracy” is:
… a government run by the worst, least qualified, or most unscrupulous citizens.
To define an evil is to take a critical step in confronting it, documenting it, managing it, and — perhaps — even eliminating it.
Historically, that has been true of perils such as cancer, climate change, and racism. So, if supporters of ethical and effective government promote usage of the term “kakistocracy,” we have a better chance of one day purging it from our politics.
Until that day arrives, here’s its latest incarnation in America. The House Republican leadership, including SPINO Kevin McCarthy (i.e., Speaker in Name Only), has selected an all-star cast of malcontents, misfits, and morons to join House committees.
On the prestigious House Oversight Committee, the functioning of American government has been entrusted to a minstrel show of misinformation: Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar, and Lauren Boebert.
These three horsemen of the apocalypse can be counted on to bring their version of legislative terrorism to blow up the functioning of the federal government. I suspect that Putin, Xi, and the Taliban are dancing the devil’s jig in their respective presidential palaces.
And in a league all his own — because his state’s Republican delegation wants nothing to do with him — we have the fourth horseman, George Santos. He has been recommended for not one, but two seats: the Science, Space and Technology Committee and the Small Business Committee.
Now, regarding the first committee: Assume that their policy discussions might include the future of space exploration. Yet contrary to what the issue requires, Mr. McCarthy has allowed the total antithesis of a rocket scientist to serve on that body.
So, in addition to Russian oligarchs, the Federal Election Commission might consider monitoring future campaign donations to Santos from Elon Musk’s SpaceX venture. (Isn’t it interesting how Musk has become the darling of MAGA world?)
Also, when does being accused of using a crowdfunding site to steal money from a veteran’s dying dog qualify as small business policy chops?
This appears to be part of a grand design. Steve Bannon asserted years ago the objective of Trumpism was to destroy the administrative state. It seems right out of his playbook to appoint the likes of Greene, Boebert, et al. to the most strategic committees of the House. Expect that they will eat away at the infrastructure of the executive branch … like a swarm of termites.
This is why I am advancing this thought experiment: The House should establish the equivalent of SATs (the high school Scholastic Aptitude Test). The tests would determine if legislators have the fundamental intelligence and character to serve on a congressional committee.
This professional examination (and continuing education requirement) can be dubbed the LATs: Legislator Aptitude Tests. And Congress should commission a non-partisan and independent body to design and administer the exam.
We expect ethical standards and competence from professionals such as our doctors, lawyers, and accountants. So, why not from politicians?
The LATs should be required every two years and would address at least three deficiencies we’ve seen exhibited repeatedly in Congress:
1) Understanding the Constitution
The test should insure representatives appointed to committees have a basic understanding of the Constitution — including those amendments that provided voting rights.
2) Basic knowledge skills
The test should assess whether a representative, regardless of his or her educational background, has a rudimentary understanding of disciplines for intelligent policy formation. That includes American history, the scientific method, basic economics, global geography, and — this might be helpful — logic and rational argumentation skills.
I recognize this might put George Santos at a disadvantage since his purported college and grad school degrees are fictions.
3) Moral character
Perhaps I assume too much, but I do assume the Founding Fathers had assumed that the office holders in the republic they designed would have some baseline of character. So, it should not be much to ask that the LAT also include some personality assessment to screen for basic flaws — like lying about how your mother died as a result of the 911 attack (Santos) and threatening your colleagues with an AR-15 (Greene).
If major corporations can use pre-employment tests in vetting executive candidates, why would we require less of those to be trusted with seats of federal power?
The results of the exam should be made available to voters to inform them of the capabilities of the legislators that represent them. However, it would be admittedly naive to think the current House majority would ever institute this measure. It would demonstrate how completely unqualified the majority of its caucus is to serve on legislative committees.
Thus, hope must rest with Democrats to adopt this thought experiment for good government. Perhaps it could be done via a House rules change. But if not, something must be done to filter out the lunacy and corruption from committee conference rooms.
Kakistocracy need not remain a cancer of our body politic. And when a SPINO is spineless, Congress should have some objective standard for determining whether a person is qualified to serve on its committees. Voters elect representatives; they don’t elect guaranteed slots on committees.
Thanks for your attention and past claps, and I welcome your responses. To follow future posts, you can press the button on the screen. — Geronimo Redstone
