Politic Poll Results
After conducting a (very non-scientific, by the way) poll, it seems that the majority of our readers feel that political volunteers should have their backgrounds checked, but the volunteers should be asked to pay for the checks themselves.
This makes for an interesting situation. With political volunteers already seemingly unpaid, fronting the cash for a background check may turn away scores of casual volunteers.
On the other hand, most background checking companies will negotiate a discount dependant on volume. When combined, these volunteers number (dependant, of course on the campaign, and the office the candidate is hoping to fill) somewhere in the thousands. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a company that's not willing to offer a discount to an entity that wants to screen thousands of volunteers within the scope of a few months.
Either way, according to the votes, something should be done, (there was only one vote in the "no" column).
posted by Richard St.Ofle @ 9:34 AM
4 Comments
Links to this post
4 Comments:
Unless I was completely head over heels with my candidate and had money to burn, I think paying for my own background check would deter me from volunteering. As mentioned, volunteers don't get paid and expecting them to shell out money is kind of nuts. I think you're right that most Background Check companies would be more than happy to offer a discount.
I think screening should be done at the cost of the candidate, not the volunteer. Think of it this way…isn’t it a smart thing for a candidate to be concerned for their safety as well as the safety and security of their campaign? Wouldn’t it reflect poorly if a campaign volunteer was found to be a criminal minded arsonist kidnapper? Or a stalker like John Hinkley Jr.? Background checks will promote the safety of everyone involved in the campaign, from the person running to the cold caller.
The added advantage of having volunteers pay for their own background checks is that the money they spend would have probably gone to the candidate's fund anyway. Now, the money is going to ensure that the volunteers have integrity and the candidates must compete on their principles not their ad buy ratio.
That candidates raise and spend so much money already is a systemic political weakness in the U.S. Making them pay for yet one more thing seems excessive.
If you're genuinely compelled by a candidate's platform and want to actively campaign, spending a little money should not be a hindrance; in fact, it may prove a true indicator of your confidence in the candidate - in the way that a bumpersticker or yard sign may not.
I once researched background check company's for my boss; most seem eager to discount for non-profit entities or individuals engaged in public service ventures.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home