Hacker News Reader

Comment by xellisx | Hacker News Reader

I think that it should be law that the finances of the people at these levels of governence (maybe even down to the city level) be open to the public to review.

View on HN

Well, it is the law that you're not eligible for a security clearance if you have significant debt.

This paints the fiasco over the Kushner security clearance in a new light.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/us/politics/jared-kushner...

I didn't know that. I'm just completely speculating right now, but I wonder if that has something to do with Jared Kushner's denied security clearance. [1]

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/28/us/politics/jared-kushner...

Does that apply to the President? (At this point it seems clear that nothing applies to the president; let’s hope to god that someone makes a new amendment for that.)

The president (and other elected positions) are carved out of those kinds of requirements: requiring an elected official to "pass" a background test created by unelected public servants amounts to an unintended check on representative democracy.

To be clear: we absolutely should require that elected officials disclose their finances. But we shouldn't require them to be vetted through a mostly unaccountable process after they've been elected.

This is very informative and clear, thanks :)

Not accurate.

Security clearances can be denied for financial irresponsibility, having “significant debt” isn’t necessarily financial irresponsibility.

I'm not overly against the idea that all tax returns should be public to some extent, certainly for politicians.

Was definitely not saying everyone's, just anyone that an elected official, or has control public policy and/or spending of tax money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com