Does a two-track security clearance process make sense?

Opinion, security clearance, Trending Commentary

in Opinion, Trending Commentary

August 20, 2018

I suggest two tracks to determine who should retain security clearances:

First: Review and revoke all clearances as warranted by the conduct of the holder.

Second: Perform a cost-benefit assessment for all security clearances held by those who are no longer on the government’s payroll. That’s just good financial sense.

The first step will protect national security. The second step will save taxpayer dollars.

Critical question: If a person without a clearance will not consult with the President, what difference does possession of a clearance make?

Allegation: Many persons are monetizing their clearances. Why should taxpayers subsidize them?

Wake up Right! Subscribe to our Morning Briefing and get the news delivered to your inbox before breakfast!

Source link

Articles You May Like

Rep. Kinzinger: Trump’s Alleged Violation of Campaign Finance Law Not ‘Anywhere Near Impeachable’
Government Watchdog Demands Probe Into New York Attorney General’s Climate Crusade Debacle
Virginia Teacher Sacked For Misgendering Transgender Student
Alleged Russian Agent Maria Butina Is Changing Her ‘Not Guilty’ Plea
REPORT: Trump To Roll Back Obama Rule On ‘Waters Of The US’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *