“Cunning, power-hungry liars have always known that if you can control people’s emotions, you can control what they believe and by extension what they do.” 

Our Proposal:

• Put into place a system to give politicians a “trustworthiness rating”  
• Introduce significant penalties for a consistently low rating

The Goal:

• Create a highly public incentive for politicians to stick to facts, ideas, and the truth

Explanation:

“To the pathological liar, words are simply sounds to manipulate others so as to achieve a desired result. Whether the words correspond to the truth or not is irrelevant.”

This quote arguably captures the mindset of many of our politicians these days. Like addicts desperate for drugs, they utter or broadcast literally anything to achieve their self-serving political goals, showing their contempt for the voting public in the process. Little regard is given to the truth, nor to the damage that such behavior causes our country and our democracy. Even pushing ridiculous conspiracy theories is not off limits any more—in fact it is par for the course for an increasing number of politicians.

Democracy requires that our elected officials and candidates for office be truthful. Purposely being deceitful in the pursuit of power needs to be treated for what it is: an unforgivable violation of the democratic process. If the voters cannot distinguish truth from lies, then our ability to choose candidates and adopt policies that move the country forward is shackled, to the detriment of progress and prosperity, and to the delight of democracy’s enemies everywhere. These enemies want nothing more than for us to become frustrated with democracy, and ultimately abandon it.

Lying used to have ramifications for politicians in our country. Presidents George W. Bush, Clinton, Nixon, Johnson and others paid significant political prices for lying. Sadly, the emotionally-charged state of politics in our country nowadays shows itself in the skewed way in which we react to our politicians’ lies and other disgraceful behavior. More and more it seems we just shrug off lying as the new normal. As one former congressman recently noted: “There is a new willingness to stand truth on its head and to wield the weapon of deception whenever it is convenient to do so.“

This dangerous trend is linked to the abandonment of one of the principles that forms the foundation of our democracy, our prosperity, and even of civilization itself: equality under the law. It is the notion that when a transgression is committed, the focus must be on the nature of the transgression, rather than on the characteristics of the alleged perpetrator. It is the idea that a single legal standard should apply to all, and that things such as skin color, religion, or political orientation should not be factors when seeking justice. This principle is applicable to many other aspects of our lives as well, besides just legal ones, including how we react to politicians’ lies. Specifically, in the political arena when this principle is tossed aside and the focus is on who lied, instead of the act of lying, the disturbing result is that lying is no big deal if it is done by a member of one’s own political tribe, but it is an outrage if done by anyone else—especially political opponents. Imagine how the Democrats would have reacted to Bill Clinton’s lies if he had been a Republican. Imagine how the Republicans would have reacted to Donald Trump’s lies if he had been a Democrat.

A side note: when this principle of a single standard is ignored by enough people, it is no exaggeration that we potentially start down a slippery path from a civilized society based on the rule of law toward a chaotic one based on unfettered savagery. America becoming another Rwanda is not impossible if there is a sufficiently large powder keg of tribal hatred combined with the forsaking of principles, where laws and punishment are applied differently according political party, and where eliminating one’s opponents is acceptable regardless of how brutal the means.

Why are the liars winning?

It boils down to these two basic issues: one, our politicians have found there is very little downside to lying, as it is a tried-and-true way to manipulate the public’s emotions. The other (even more worrying) issue is that in too many cases voters believe the lies because they choose to, even if “deep down” they know better; even if there is no evidence to support the lie. (The 2020 presidential election is a prime example.) This is why the liars are winning, because people want to believe the lies. As a result, politics in our country have degenerated into a cesspool of lies and mud-slinging, misrepresentations, and frenzied power-grabs, backed up by distorted media campaigns and zero-principles political commentators. Elections are now less a competition of ideas, but rather lowbrow campaigns to stoke the public’s emotions, saying whatever it takes to do so no matter how outrageous or detached from reality. As long as our politicians and their special interest and media allies know that emotions such as anger and hatred motivate large numbers of disgruntled voters more than ideas do, they will continue to say ever more audacious, emotion-stoking falsehoods.

But lying is just part of a larger problem. The ever more severe culture war-driven division in our country means that politicians are increasingly held unaccountable by their supporters not only for their lying, but also for misdeeds, flagrant mistakes, and even crimes. An electorate driven primarily by hatred for political opponents will stick with their tribe’s politicians no matter what; lies are defended as truthful “alternative facts”, or simply believed. Outrageous behavior and crimes are overlooked, minimized, or even justified.

We must ask ourselves: if power-addicted, special interest-catering liars with no principles run our government, and if significant numbers of voters apply different standards of behavior depending on the political party, what kind of country can we expect to have?

Steps to Address the Problem

The Supreme Court has ruled that lying, even by those running for office, is protected by the First Amendment. Does that mean that lying politicians should just be tolerated and treated with impunity?

Obviously not. In the same way an employee can be fired for lying on the job, or a job candidate can be disqualified for lying during an interview, politicians must face consequences for blatant lying. Lying to gain or retain the power of elected office cannot be permitted.

Addressing the mendacity in our politics needs to be part of a multi-faceted approach to fixing our democracy; the Solutions Party believes that the following (already-proposed) ideas will be useful in that effort:

1. Recommit ourselves to being a nation based on principles, specifically in this case applying a single standard when it comes to how we deal with lying politicians
2. Eliminate reelection, thereby removing a major incentive to lie
3. Enforce limited lifetimes for government-recognized political parties, to help prevent the rise of political tribalism and associated zero-principles behavior
4. Certify journalists and news organizations so that voters have creditable sources of facts, information, and worthy points of view from principled commentators
5. Reform our elections by giving attractive incentives for voters to get educated on the issues

To more specifically address the issue of lying in politics, significant disincentives must also be put into place. To this end the Solutions Party proposes the following additional measures:

1. Implement a system to assign political candidates and office holders a “trustworthiness rating.” Multiple human and automated components could be combined to generate a trustworthiness average, similar to the Tomatometer for movies. In the same way that students are graded, politicians should be rated according to the consistency with which they stick to facts and principles, and otherwise avoid distortions of the truth, outright lies, and double standards. The rating could appear on voting ballots next to the candidates’ names
2. Put into place significant monetary penalties for politicians with consistently low trustworthiness ratings (a grace period to improve their rating would be given). Individuals who register themselves as candidates for office would be required to agree to the terms associated with the trustworthiness rating. In the case of office holders, significant deductions from their paychecks could be implemented for low trustworthiness ratings
3. The ability to ban those with particularly egregious trustworthiness ratings from ever running for office again could also be another potential instrument in the anti-lying tool box

The overall goal of these proposals is to turn the current situation on its head: to create a significant upside for staying truthful and diligent (i.e. a high trustworthiness rating), and a significant risk for lying and having an egregious lack of principles (i.e. low trustworthiness rating and financial penalties). Such a risk should “come with the territory,” since seeking, or being entrusted with, the power of political office brings with it a sacred responsibility that needs to be treated as such. Strong incentives must exist for placing honesty above political ambition-fueled lying. We should expect politicians to adhere to, and be examples of, higher standards of behavior.

It is anticipated that the idea of a trustworthiness rating will be strongly opposed by unscrupulous politicians who regularly lie and for whom principles are nonexistent. Just like with all fraudsters, their power derives from the trust that their supporters place in them, and their ability to manipulate that trust with lies. Let us endeavor to have a country with politicians who stick to ideas, facts, and the truth, instead of relying on falsehoods and emotion manipulation in their quest for power.