The Secret Service and the Prostitutes

Mark Sullivan, Director of the United States Secret Service, believes that what happened in Cartagen (Columbia) last April, twelve secret service agents caught with their pants down, is an isolated event.  He insists it is not a systematic, cultural issue. Dumbfounded is the word he uses about hearing the story for the first time.


For us, that he would be dumbfounded, is the hardest part to believe.

What's that mean, anyway, a systematic, cultural issue?

Systematic, in research, indicates that an event repeats, often, under predictable circumstances.  Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, noted the agents used their own names when signing in prostitutes as overnight guests in their hotel rooms. Senator Collins thought that had this been an isolated event, then the agents would have feared exposure, would never have used their own names registering at the hotel.

But they didn't seem to worry about a thing, visited several night clubs and strip bars, and brought home the known prostitutes, who registered under their own names, too.

That they feared nothing is an indication that they had done this so many times before, they learned there was nothing to fear.  They knew there would be no discipline.  There's that repetition thing.

The cultural issue would be a description of how a system responds to variants of behavioral norms.  No discipline, laxity, tolerance of behavior unbecoming to the protectors of the President of the United States, should be a variant of executive branch culture.  But since such behavior is tolerated, it is the cultural norm.

What is egregious about this lack of discipline, tolerance of sexual promiscuity and alcohol indulgence to the degree that it impairs decision-making, is that as sworn public servants, these men should know the circumstances that contribute to compromising the success of their mission in foreign lands.

This is why so many are upset with a culture tolerant of systematic promiscuous behavior.  It isn't because we're such prudes.

Collins noted that "it is basic 'counterintelligence 101' that Secret Service personnel and others holding sensitive positions of trust in the U.S. government should avoid any situation that could provide a foreign intelligence or security service or criminal gangs with the means of exerting coercion or blackmail. Yet two of the primary means of entrapment -- sexual lures and alcohol -- were both present here in abundance."

While preliminary findings are that no weapons or classified material was in the agents' rooms, those involved "could easily have been drugged or kidnapped, or had their liaisons with these foreign national used to blackmail them," she said. "They willingly made themselves potential targets not only for intelligence or security services, but also for groups like" drug cartels.

Step down, Mr. Sullivan.  The job market isn't that tight that the country can't replace you. As should the twelve agents implicated in the scandal.

And the new hires?  Something tells us they won't repeat the mistakes of their predecessors.

We'll be glad to discuss the science of systems and dysfunctional culture with members of the Executive Branch, and the Legislative and Judicial branches, as well.  The objective of our workshops (Safe Service division of Relationship-Wise, Inc.) is clarity of thinking, and the essence of representation-- even on road trips.  It is not as easy as people might think.  Just ask Mr. Sullivan.

Linda Freedman, PhD