I see a fundamental problem with the required alignment, of this otherwise surprisingly workable base-class. A fallacious assumption, if you like.

Ie, that a Politician must be eminently lawful of nature to succeed. This couldn't be further from the truth!

Rather, a politician must be seen to be lawful, to succeed. The amount of Politicians who have lost their careers due to lying, in or out of court is staggering, and it only follows that many, many more simply get away with it.

As I understand it, Lawful alignment doesn't mean that they don't lie, it means that they would not even consider lying, whether they would get away with it. The idea of lying, or breaking promises, is anathema to the lawful alignment.

I'd say, rather, that Neutral alignment is absolutely essential for a serious politician. The willingness to bend the truth and to break promises when necessary is so necessary for a would-be politician to get ahead. :)

I mean, the classic cliche of a politician is hardly someone who has a firm relationship with the truth, is it? ^_^