George Santos has a problem with the truth

The news surrounding U.S. Rep. George Santos, who misled voters about his background among other things, has gained both national and international attention.

After a New York Times investigation into his past in December, the congressman admitted he had “embellished” various elements of his background, including his Jewish heritage. However, he insisted he did nothing wrong, and said he wouldn’t step down.

The daily flood of new information coming to light has left many glued to their television and computer screens, unable to turn away from the political trainwreck unfolding in front of their eyes.

Beyond its entertainment value — partially fueled by late-night television hosts — the Santos saga raises questions about the psychology of someone who seems incapable of telling the truth, and his footprint on the political landscape.

The falsehoods surrounding Santos has inspired a new bill by Nassau County Legislator Josh Lafazan, called the “GEORGE Package” — Get Egregious Officials Removed from Government Elections. If it becomes law, GEORGE will require political candidates to undergo a background check, penalizing them with a criminal misdemeanor for lying about income, employment, education history or where they live.

It would also exclude any candidate with an open foreign arrest warrant to be elected. Law enforcement in Brazil, where Santos lived for some time, say there is an open investigation into a check theft there where Santos is a suspect.

Mental health experts, like psychologist and Nassau Herald columnist Linda Sapadin, speculate that the falsehoods from Santos indicate traits of narcissistic grandiosity, an unrealistic sense of superiority. But even with those observations, Sapadin makes it clear it’s difficult to diagnose somebody without meeting them and is not necessarily saying this is a complete and accurate description of the congressman.

“Those lies are trying to make himself seem better and more important than he really is,” Sapadin said.

Psychologists don’t know whether traits of narcissism are inborn or if they’re shaped by upbringing. But what they do know is that these traits develop at a young age. It’s common for narcissists to demand things be in their favor.

“In childhood, they make these little lies,” Sapadin said. “But as they learn that they can get away with the lies, they tend to make them more outlandish because they see it’s working.”

Even with a number of news outlets casting serious doubts about his claims of where he worked, where he lived and where he went to school — among other things — Santos refused to step down, even after Republicans in Nassau County banded together, calling for his resignation.

“He shows no remorse,” Sapadin said. “It seems to most voters that he doesn’t care about the impact of what he’s done. This is a major indication of narcissism, and certainly lack of empathy for others and for what goes on in the world.”

Sapadin also suspects Santos doesn’t internalize right and wrong, and that he only cares about what is best for him.

Still, the congressman’s actions have left many voters feeling angry and duped. They have doubts Santos can be trusted to represent the best interests of the people in his district above his own.

Glen Head’s Michele Purcell voted for Santos, but now feels he is emotionally unfit to represent her.

“Every day is a new level of horror,” Purcell said. “I don’t even care if we lose the seat, I just think he should go. I can’t put any trust in him at all.”

Hofstra University political science professor William Schaefer said that political trust and accountability is a sore topic for Republicans right now.

“I think the Republicans have a stain in the 3rd District that’s going to be looked at more carefully,” he said.

In the meantime, it is up to Congress to decide how they will handle these extensive falsehoods.
Schaefer cites the “political question doctrine,” in which the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that when there are issues that clearly fall within the domain of one of the other branches of government, that they are going to defer to that branch of government to make those decisions, and will not involve themselves.

Yet, there is irony to Santos being thrust into the political spotlight, Schaefer says. While Santos has become a joke people are using against the Republican Party, one could almost make the argument that is good news for the GOP because it takes emphasis away from the perceived dysfunction of the Republican Congress.

Even though many voters don’t have time to do their own research, Schaefer advises adopting a more cynical view during election season, and not taking things said by any candidate at face value.