Campaign Debt and the Vetting Process

It was reported in June 2008 by ABC News that there are a number of candidates for political office that have millions of dollars in unpaid campaign debt. Significant campaign debt is owed by a number of politicians which include Hillary Clinton, Rudy Giuliani, Mitt Romney, Dennis Kucinich, Jeanine Pirro, John Glenn and Joe Biden. This campaign debt amounts to millions of dollars and in many cases will never be repaid. For instance it is reported that John Glenn has recently given up on repaying his 1984 campaign debt of approximately $3 million dollars.

While one can understand that the task of attempting to recover the campaign debt of John Glenn might prove fruitless, it should not be the case for candidates that are still active in the political process. They owe campaign debt to hardworking Americans who provided goods or services with the expectation of being paid for their efforts. Clinton, Giuliani, Romney and Biden should be required to pay their past debts before they ascend to any other positions of political power. Some of the debt is owed to the candidates themselves. Clinton reportedly owes herself $11 million with a balance of about $9 million owed to others. Almost all of the campaign debt of Romney is owed to himself. Debts that are owed to the candidates themselves should be the last to be paid. Let's hope that is the case. Giulani has a current campaign debt of about $3.4 million. The final debtor of those that might see themselves in positions of power depending on which party wins the general election in November is Joe Biden. He reportedly owes $1.2 million from his failed 1988 campaign to a number of Americans that he contracted with for goods or services.

Here is where the intersection of the campaign debt story and the vetting process gets interesting.

Each candidate running for elective office is subjected to a vetting process by campaign staffs, however that vetting process does not appear to be as thorough as the vetting that is conducted by bloggers and writers on the Internet. The bloggers and Internet writers vetting process, while often partisan and subject in many instances to be a bit scurrilous is, however, often revealing about the candidates, their families and their real beliefs and judgments about what might be important. Often a window into the heart of a candidates is opened. Whether it is fair or not is often dictated by the political leanings of the individual reader. Sometimes bloggers uncover significant events that go unnoticed by campaign staffs or major media reporters. The question here is, how should campaign debt intersect with the vetting process?

Should Senator Biden be required to retire his 1988 debt before he can spend money on his current campaign? Recently there was a story that circulated widely on the Internet. It was written by an accountant that was extremely unhappy about the fact that Biden had failed to pay a 1988 campaign debt. The writer claimed that he wrote an email to a few close friends and it was leaked widely throughout the Internet. The writer now claims that the debt has been paid in full. Was this a hoax? One can read the full story here (http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/bidendebt.asp) and reach their own conclusion. An analysis might lead one to believe that once the story became widely viewable on the Internet that the vetting process and campaign debt came face to face and the repayment of a just debt was quickly and properly addressed. One can hope that Senator Biden will address the remainder of his 1988 debt campaign debt which he still owes.

While Romney is likely off the hook in this campaign debt vetting process since he only owes money to himself, it appears that Clinton and Giuliani have a moral obligation, as part of any vetting process that might see them considered for high political office, to retire their campaign debt prior to assuming any such office.

This information might prove instructional for those involved in the vetting process. This may also be important to those Americans that are awaiting payment for campaign debt. Voters might chose to make their opinions known when they cast a ballot in November.