Sue Vorenberg reports for the Albuquerque Tribune. Excerpt:
A new study saying polygraph tests are not accurate enough to screen government employees for potential security risks doesn’t surprise Al Zelicoff.
But it doesn’t go far enough for him, either.
Zelicoff, a senior scientist at Sandia National Laboratories and a leading critic of polygraph tests, said Congress should change a law requiring the tests.
“The polygraph itself is not only worthless, it creates a climate of fear and paranoia,” Zelicoff said. “That can’t be good for national security.”
The National Research Council released its study of polygraph testing Tuesday.
“Its accuracy in distinguishing actual or potential security violators from innocent test takers is insufficient to justify reliance on its use in employee security screening in federal agencies,” the study said.
National laboratories, including Los Alamos and Sandia, have used polygraphs for workers in sensitive positions since the polygraph was created. In 1999, Congress mandated that the Department of Energy start using them in routine security checks. And that was when it all went wrong, Zelicoff said.
“The polygraph is a ruse designed to provide an excuse to conduct a wide-ranging inquisition under unpleasant psychological conditions,” he said. “It gets worse: `You’re lying to me.’ `You’re too immature to have a security clearance.’ `I don’t think I can help you anymore.’ Those are real statements that have been made to Sandians in the past year. Does that qualify as harassment in the workplace? If it doesn’t have any value, it does. That’s what the NRC just said.”