Source: BBC News
Introduction
As Democratic presidential hopeful Kamala Harris vets potential running mates, the contenders undergo an exhaustive and highly invasive process. This vetting procedure, often likened to a “colonoscopy performed with a telescope,” delves deep into their personal and professional lives to ensure there are no hidden skeletons that could jeopardize the campaign.
Quick Summary
- Key Players: Kamala Harris, potential running mates (e.g., Josh Shapiro, Mark Kelly, Pete Buttigieg)
- Main Events: Intense vetting process involving up to 200 questions and thorough background checks.
- Impact: Ensures the candidate’s suitability and minimizes risk of scandal.
- Notable Quotes: “Like having a colonoscopy performed with a telescope” – Evan Bayh.
Detailed Breakdown
The Vetting Process
The vetting of vice-presidential candidates is a meticulous and comprehensive procedure designed to uncover any potential issues that might arise during the campaign.
- Questionnaires: Potential candidates must answer up to 200 detailed questions, covering everything from personal habits to financial records.
- Investigations: Campaign officials and volunteer lawyers conduct thorough investigations, including reviewing tax returns, medical histories, and social media accounts of the candidates and their families.
- Confidentiality: The process is shrouded in strict confidentiality, with notes destroyed after the vetting to protect privacy.
Historical Context
The vetting process has evolved significantly over the years, becoming more rigorous after notable vetting failures in the past.
- 1972 Incident: George McGovern’s running mate, Thomas Eagleton, was dropped after just 18 days when it emerged he had received electroshock treatment for clinical depression.
- 1984 Scandal: Geraldine Ferraro’s campaign was marred by revelations about her husband’s financial dealings.
- 2008 Selection: John McCain’s rushed vetting of Sarah Palin led to controversies and questions about her readiness for the national stage.
Personal Experiences
Several politicians have shared their experiences with the vetting process, highlighting its invasive nature.
- Evan Bayh: Described the procedure as “like having a colonoscopy performed with a telescope” and detailed the extensive scrutiny he faced, including interviews with his family members.
- Al Gore: Faced unexpected personal questions during his vetting, which revealed his limited social circle, raising concerns among campaign officials.
The Role of Vetters
The vetters play a crucial role in the selection process, often discovering potential red flags that could disqualify a candidate.
- Jim Hamilton: A veteran vetter, Hamilton emphasizes the thoroughness of the process and the surprising candor of candidates once they commit to it.
- Gary Ginsberg: Noted how unexpected questions during vetting can reveal important aspects of a candidate’s personality and suitability.
Final Decision
Ultimately, the choice of a running mate lies with the presidential nominee, who must weigh the vetting team’s findings against their personal judgment.
- Obama’s Choice: Barack Obama’s decision between Evan Bayh and Joe Biden came down to a “coin toss,” highlighting the subjective nature of the final selection.
- Bush’s Gut Feeling: George HW Bush chose Dan Quayle based on intuition rather than extensive vetting, a decision that had mixed results.
The vetting process for vice-presidential candidates is an exhaustive and invasive procedure designed to ensure the selection of a reliable and scandal-free running mate. While it has evolved to become more rigorous over the years, the final decision always carries an element of subjectivity, underscoring the importance of both thorough vetting and personal judgment in the selection process.