5 ms·

Financial stability is one of the most important criteria checked when you apply for clearance. I read through a public list of the decisions on clearance appe

Financial stability is one of the most important criteria checked when you apply for clearance. I read through a public list of the decisions on clearance appeals a couple of years ago, and financial concerns were a very common reason for denied clearances. (Might have been http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/ http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/) Another thing I found interesting from that list was that a lot of concerns (e.g. earlier drug consumption) could be successfully addressed, but lying on the questionnaire was pretty close to an absolute no-go. I also expected a lot more denials for political opinion to stop ideologically motivated whistleblowers, but barely found any such entries.

Swenrekcah 8y ago
Interesting, thanks. Regarding the last point, I might add that I would expect any denial that is really based on political ideology to be offically due to anything but.
dx87 8y ago
I think the only politically related questions you get asked are whether or not you've ever been a terrorist, and whether or not you've been a member of or supported an organization that was attempting to violently overthrow the governemnt. You're spot on about drugs though. They really don't care what you did in your past, as long as you don't have a criminal record from it, and you're honest. They just don't want people hiding things that can be used for blackmail.
- yornax 8y ago
  Q. Hey, guy, you're not a... terrorist, are ya? A. Why, no! Of course not! I would never! Right this way, sir!
o10449366 8y ago
Not for the current administration, apparently. "...Ms. Newbold also asserted that the Trump administration had made changes to security protocols that made it easier for individuals to get clearances. The changes included stopping credit checks on applicants to work in the White House, which she said helps identify if employees of the president could be susceptible to blackmail."[0] [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/us/politics/trump-security-clearances.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/us/politics/trump-securit...
- 1stcity3rdcoast 8y ago
  Not sure why the parent comment is being downvoted —- the allegations against the current administration for bypassing the financial and credit checks for high-level security clearances are very relevant to the discussion. The whistleblower, an 18-year civil servant, allegedly received retribution from superiors for speaking out against the abuse, which puts our national security at risk by inviting foreign powers to leverage government officials.
- caymanjim 8y ago
  These are exceptions made for a very small hand-selected group of Trump's cronies working in the White House. It doesn't really have much to do with the procedures in place for normal clearances, and they didn't change the regulations, they just granted e.g. his kids a waiver. I don't approve of it, but don't extrapolate it to a policy change.
rsynnott 8y ago
> I also expected a lot more denials for political opinion to stop ideologically motivated whistleblowers, but barely found any such entries. Realistically this could be a concern with nearly any ideology, so unless you were going to reject anyone who had political opinions at all (and to be honest I’d be pretty suspicious of people who claimed not to on such a form) that’s probably a nonstarter.
- CodesInChaos 8y ago
  I'm not talking about partisan politics or opinions irrelevant to the clearance. But rather about people being opposed to mass surveillance or other important activities conducted by the the intelligence community or military which might tempt the individual to whistleblow if they learned about unacceptable behaviour in those areas.
  - user5994461 8y ago
    People opposed to intelligence work wouldn't apply for a job doing just that and requiring a secret clearance.
    - GVIrish 8y ago
      Not true. There may be people looking to get into that field who hope to have the chance to leak information. Imagine someone inspired by Snowden who wanted to unmask some other clandestine program that they didn't agree with or viewed as immoral.
      - yeahButSo 8y ago
        What's worse is when you have people swoop in to recruit from the other direction. People that never fucking go away. People that act like they're your friends. People that are looking for recruitment bonuses. People that say they really want you on the team. Oh wow, so smart, but gee, what an attitude If only, if only... And here you are, minding your own business, completely disinterested in getting people murdered, in following and harassing people, getting inside their heads, convincing them to commit crimes against their own country, to help yours. Don't do drugs at home, because we need people dead in other countries, right? Watch me not lose a night's sleep over that.
Cidan 8y ago
Many years ago, I worked for a contractor where we required clearance. We hired this one sysadmin "stick it to the man" type of guy that was extremely well educated and talented. When he got to the part of the form that asked if he has ever consumed drugs, he said "yes" as he should have by being honest. The follow up question asks something along the lines of, "If yes, will you ever consume drugs again?" The jack-ass decided to answer "I won't not do them again..." We fired him a few days later.
- mijamo 8y ago
  Are those questions about illegal drugs or all drugs? Can you answer you don't take drugs when you smoke or drink alcohol? What if you have Marijuana in a country where it is legal? What about alcohol in a country where it is not? Is the trouble for the government that you are willing to go against the law, or that yoj could be under influence?
  - user5994461 8y ago
    It's a questionnaire to get a security clearance in the US. Pretty sure it's only from a US perspective and you'd be disqualified if you lived abroad where these concerns would make any sense.
  - dlgeek 8y ago
    "In the last seven (7) years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances? Use of a drug or controlled substance includes injecting, snorting, inhaling, swallowing, experimenting with or otherwise consuming any drug or controlled substance. [...] In the last seven (7) years have you intentionally engaged in the misuse of prescription drugs, regardless of whether or not the drugs were prescribed for you or someone else? [...] In the last seven (7) years has your use of alcohol had a negative impact on your work performance, your professional or personal relationships, your finances, or resulted in intervention by law enforcement/public safety personnel?" They also ask a bunch of other questions as follow-ons. https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86-non508.pdf https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86-non508.pdf form page 93 PDF page 96.
- 8y ago

Swenrekcah 8y ago

Interesting, thanks. Regarding the last point, I might add that I would expect any denial that is really based on political ideology to be offically due to anything but.

dx87 8y ago

I think the only politically related questions you get asked are whether or not you've ever been a terrorist, and whether or not you've been a member of or supported an organization that was attempting to violently overthrow the governemnt. You're spot on about drugs though. They really don't care what you did in your past, as long as you don't have a criminal record from it, and you're honest. They just don't want people hiding things that can be used for blackmail.

yornax 8y ago
Q. Hey, guy, you're not a... terrorist, are ya? A. Why, no! Of course not! I would never! Right this way, sir!

o10449366 8y ago

Not for the current administration, apparently. "...Ms. Newbold also asserted that the Trump administration had made changes to security protocols that made it easier for individuals to get clearances. The changes included stopping credit checks on applicants to work in the White House, which she said helps identify if employees of the president could be susceptible to blackmail."[0] [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/us/politics/trump-security-clearances.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/us/politics/trump-securit...

1stcity3rdcoast 8y ago
Not sure why the parent comment is being downvoted —- the allegations against the current administration for bypassing the financial and credit checks for high-level security clearances are very relevant to the discussion. The whistleblower, an 18-year civil servant, allegedly received retribution from superiors for speaking out against the abuse, which puts our national security at risk by inviting foreign powers to leverage government officials.
caymanjim 8y ago
These are exceptions made for a very small hand-selected group of Trump's cronies working in the White House. It doesn't really have much to do with the procedures in place for normal clearances, and they didn't change the regulations, they just granted e.g. his kids a waiver. I don't approve of it, but don't extrapolate it to a policy change.

rsynnott 8y ago

> I also expected a lot more denials for political opinion to stop ideologically motivated whistleblowers, but barely found any such entries. Realistically this could be a concern with nearly any ideology, so unless you were going to reject anyone who had political opinions at all (and to be honest I’d be pretty suspicious of people who claimed not to on such a form) that’s probably a nonstarter.

CodesInChaos 8y ago
I'm not talking about partisan politics or opinions irrelevant to the clearance. But rather about people being opposed to mass surveillance or other important activities conducted by the the intelligence community or military which might tempt the individual to whistleblow if they learned about unacceptable behaviour in those areas.
- user5994461 8y ago
  People opposed to intelligence work wouldn't apply for a job doing just that and requiring a secret clearance.
  - GVIrish 8y ago
    Not true. There may be people looking to get into that field who hope to have the chance to leak information. Imagine someone inspired by Snowden who wanted to unmask some other clandestine program that they didn't agree with or viewed as immoral.
    - yeahButSo 8y ago
      What's worse is when you have people swoop in to recruit from the other direction. People that never fucking go away. People that act like they're your friends. People that are looking for recruitment bonuses. People that say they really want you on the team. Oh wow, so smart, but gee, what an attitude If only, if only... And here you are, minding your own business, completely disinterested in getting people murdered, in following and harassing people, getting inside their heads, convincing them to commit crimes against their own country, to help yours. Don't do drugs at home, because we need people dead in other countries, right? Watch me not lose a night's sleep over that.

Cidan 8y ago

Many years ago, I worked for a contractor where we required clearance. We hired this one sysadmin "stick it to the man" type of guy that was extremely well educated and talented. When he got to the part of the form that asked if he has ever consumed drugs, he said "yes" as he should have by being honest. The follow up question asks something along the lines of, "If yes, will you ever consume drugs again?" The jack-ass decided to answer "I won't not do them again..." We fired him a few days later.

mijamo 8y ago
Are those questions about illegal drugs or all drugs? Can you answer you don't take drugs when you smoke or drink alcohol? What if you have Marijuana in a country where it is legal? What about alcohol in a country where it is not? Is the trouble for the government that you are willing to go against the law, or that yoj could be under influence?
- user5994461 8y ago
  It's a questionnaire to get a security clearance in the US. Pretty sure it's only from a US perspective and you'd be disqualified if you lived abroad where these concerns would make any sense.
- dlgeek 8y ago
  "In the last seven (7) years, have you illegally used any drugs or controlled substances? Use of a drug or controlled substance includes injecting, snorting, inhaling, swallowing, experimenting with or otherwise consuming any drug or controlled substance. [...] In the last seven (7) years have you intentionally engaged in the misuse of prescription drugs, regardless of whether or not the drugs were prescribed for you or someone else? [...] In the last seven (7) years has your use of alcohol had a negative impact on your work performance, your professional or personal relationships, your finances, or resulted in intervention by law enforcement/public safety personnel?" They also ask a bunch of other questions as follow-ons. https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86-non508.pdf https://www.opm.gov/forms/pdf_fill/sf86-non508.pdf form page 93 PDF page 96.
8y ago