If to hold office, one had to pass Character eligibility metrics, what would you support?

“In the future” doesn’t apply to the 2024 election at all, so keep your leanings to yourself.


Simply, “IF” we were to introduce a character constitutional amendment what metrics would you support…For example, to run for a federal office (senator/rep/pres), to be appointed to the Supreme Court, ambassador, or similar the person had to qualify under a new amendment to the constitution that establishes “ qualifying character”…. What metrics would you support as disqualifying eligibility?

Examples:

1. Never been divorced.
2. No children out of wedlock.
3. Never a lower credit score than 700 after 30.
4. Never a felony conviction.
5. Never been disbarred or had a professional license revoked
6. Never had an academic expulsion.
7. Never had a tax lien
8. Never proven to have had an affair
9. Never applied for dual citizenship
10. Never been pardoned

With 300 million people I know we might inadvertently disqualify a notable person, but for the most powerful positions in the world, I think we should aim for the cream of the crop.

Those who have shown a lifelong unwavering commitment to honesty, integrity, & responsibility should be elevated over those who have established negative histories.

Someone who divorces is more likely to get divorced again, someone who has an abortion is more likely to have an abortion again, someone who commits a felony is more likely to commit a felony again….recidivism is not just criminal its behavioral. People who have shown the propensity to have a negative characteristic or more likely to repeat…that is the point of the disqualification.

If everybody agreed and we were to introduce a character clause in the constitution, what character metrics would you support? (Feel free to add)