Can Congress Force a President to Take a Cognitive Test?

It's no secret that some members of Congress, like Margery Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert, have a reputation for being outspoken in the public sphere. However, questioning whether they or any other public figure should be subject to cognitive tests brings a unique set of ethical and practical considerations. The idea of forcing a president to take a cognitive test is both intriguing and controversial. Let’s explore this topic, including the implications and potential outcomes.

The Current Reality

The United States President receives some of the best healthcare in the world, which includes regular health evaluations. However, cognitive test results, much like aircraft landing safety records, are oftentimes not publicly disclosed. The media typically focuses on the few occasions when a president makes a public blunder or shows signs of disorientation, such as Joe Biden's momentary forgetfulness during speeches. The majority of successful executive functions remain unreported, much like the thousands of safe aircraft landings each day go unnoticed.

Handling Suspicions of Dementia

If there was credible evidence of a president showing signs of dementia, a swift yet confidential response would likely be the best course of action. The process would involve the President’s family, their healthcare professionals, and select members of Congress from both parties. If the suspicion were confirmed, the president would likely resign, but the process would be handled discreetly to protect both the nation and the presidency. Publicizing such a situation could lead to further instability and crisis.

The Case for Screening Presidential Candidates

While directly targeting an incumbent president is one thing, screening candidates prior to their ascension to the presidency is a different matter. Democracy depends on trust and transparency, which is why every presidential candidate should be required to undergo a series of rigorous tests. These should include basic psychological health assessments, civics and political science tests, and the disclosure of tax returns. Additionally, candidates should be able to accurately identify major countries on a map. These measures ensure that candidates are well-prepared and capable of handling the immense responsibilities of the presidency.

The Dilemma of Political Pressure

Now, let’s consider a hypothetical scenario: Suppose a vote is held in Congress demanding that President Biden undergo a cognitive function test, and he refuses. What would that say about him? In a position of immense authority and power, the president faces immense political pressure. Allowing one’s opponent to force a cognitive test might seem like a dangerous gamble. On the other hand, not complying with the demand could damage public trust and confidence.

Would the opposing party agree to the same terms and exams? This is a valid concern. Introducing such a procedure could be seen as a political ploy or an attempt to undermine the president. Congress doesn’t have the authority to force cognitive tests for a reason: doing so could backfire and undermine their own credibility.

For the safety and stability of the nation, it’s crucial to maintain a delicate balance between transparency and confidentiality. While testing candidates before they assume office can be beneficial, direct testing of an incumbent president would need to be handled with extreme caution. The principle of equal treatment and fairness must be upheld to maintain public trust in the governance process.

Conclusion

The idea of forcing a president to take a cognitive test is complex and fraught with significant implications. While it’s important to ensure that leaders are capable and healthy, the process must be approached with extreme care to avoid potential political backfires. Transparency in the selection and preparation of candidates is essential, while the well-being of the president should be managed with the utmost discretion.