Security checks are only for the masses

"If security of the House of Representatives is based on how members of Congress wear their hair...that is ridiculous," said Rep Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga) to CNN's Wolf Blitzer. [Washington Post 4 April 2006]

Not to put too fine a point on this, but I would expect that security at the House and the Senate, like the security around every other government building in Washington, DC and the nation would be exactly the same. If you want to get through the doors, you show a proper ID. I would hope that security on the House would not be based on how anyone looks, but on whether or not their ID matches the standards as set down under HSPD-12.

The problem is this - every single person that wishes to enter a federal building (who is not a member of Congress it seems) has to have a proper ID. This ID, as of HSPD-12, has to contain certain verified items, the finger prints of the individual being only one of many. Why is it, then, that the members of Congress are not required to follow the same procedures? Do they also get a pass on the background checks that everyone has to undergo (under HSPD-12). Are they allowed to carry weapons (the answer should surprise you - it is yes) with out being searched but everyone else has to bend over and take it?

Rep. McKinney is feeling put out because she blew through a security check point an was stopped like everyone else. She is claiming it is race related. The Capitol Police are proffering charges of simple assault against her (as they should, although I would like to have seen the more serious charge of assaulting a police officer). While it may be a he said/she said case, the basis is still the same. In Washington, you do not blow through security, whether elected, appointed or a humble civil servant. No exceptions. Otherwise, why bother in the first place?