End the Ineffective Use of Polygraphs in Federal Law Enforcement Hiring
The Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010 introduced the requirement of pre-employment polygraphs for federal law enforcement applicants, such as those applying to CBP. While the act aimed to reduce corruption, it has unintentionally created severe hiring challenges and an unjust stigma for many qualified applicants.
The Problem with Polygraphs:
Unreliable Outcomes: The failure rate for CBP applicants is alarmingly high, often exceeding 50-65%​​​​​​. Many of these failures are not due to dishonesty but are caused by stress, misunderstanding, or the inherent flaws in polygraph technology.
Scientific Flaws: Polygraphs are not admissible in court because they lack scientific reliability, yet they are used to make career-defining decisions.
Qualified Candidates Disqualified: Each year, veterans, law enforcement officers, and other qualified individuals with clean records are unjustly eliminated during the hiring process.
Impact on the Workforce: CBP is already struggling with staffing shortages, particularly on the frontlines. The polygraph process worsens this by disqualifying candidates who could help address the border crisis.
My Story:
I joined CBP in 2012, prior to the mandatory polygraph requirement. Over my career:
I became a K-9 handler in 2015, intercepting thousands of pounds of narcotics.
I switched careers in 2020 to another DHS agency but later sought to return to CBP.
During the re-hiring process, I was subjected to a polygraph and wrongfully labeled as deceptive—despite nearly a decade of service and no criminal history.
This failure shattered my career aspirations. I was deemed unsuitable for my previous armed role despite passing the same thorough background investigation required for employment. I am now employed in an unarmed position within CBP, unable to return to my old role due to the polygraph stigma after completing the same background and suitability clearance.
Why the Polygraph Must Go:
1. Historical Context: Corruption within CBP and Border Patrol was not significantly different before the polygraph requirement was implemented.
2. Background Investigations Work: Comprehensive background checks and field investigations are more reliable indicators of a candidate’s integrity, character, and suitability.
3. National Security Concerns: Disqualifying competent individuals based on a flawed process worsens staffing challenges at a time when national security demands more boots on the ground.
Recent Cases of Corruption:
Even with polygraphs in place, some employees bypass the system:
Cases of CBP officers convicted of smuggling drugs or facilitating illegal crossings continue to emerge, proving that polygraphs do not prevent corruption entirely​​​​.
Call to Action:
It’s time to repeal or amend the Anti-Border Corruption Act of 2010. Let’s:
Replace polygraphs with improved background checks.
Focus on hiring based on merit, integrity, and thorough investigation—not unreliable technology.
Support our agencies in filling critical positions with qualified, dedicated personnel.
Together, we can ensure our border and national security are maintained without sacrificing fairness or efficiency. Let’s end this ineffective, harmful process.