Organizing for America | Art Berkowitz's Blog: Issue #5

Issue #5 - Ethics in Government

By Art from Laguna Hills, CA - Oct 12th, 2008 at 10:02 pm EDT

Comments | Mail to a Friend | Report Objectionable Content

As an author and speaker on ethics in business, it might seem peculiar for me to be posting an article on government ethics. But is it really that different from ethics in business, especially during the last dozen or so years? What is the difference between Alaska Senator Ted Stevens and Enron Chairman Ken Lay? They both broke trust with their constituency and the public in general.

I do think it is important to address the skeptics out there who believe that everyone who goes into politics is corrupt. Having worked around politicians for nearly half a century, I can say without hesitation that most of the men and women I met who go into government service truly believe that they can accomplish something worthwhile for their fellow citizens. It isn't that different from those who go into the ministry, the medical profession, accounting, or law. Yet who can disagree that each of these professions has seen more than its share of corruption...and in case you think your occupation/profession is exempt from its fair share of crooks, let me assure you that public and private charities, teachers, and as we so well now know, bankers and financial advisers, have plenty of unsavory characters in their midst.

So what makes ethics in government special?

That is the point. It isn't, but we would like it to be so. Most of us want to believe that the people we help put in office through our votes, support, and/or money try to do the right thing.

You did notice that I said most of us. Because in politics as in life, we have groups (you can decide whether they are large or small) who get involved in politics only to have undue influence on their elected and appointed officials so that they can benefit personally. I say undue influence because it is part of human nature to want to be recognized for our efforts. When that recognition crosses the line is a matter for voters, ethicists, and sometimes even the courts to decide. I would add that it is not only those people who are looking to personally benefit who help corrupt our system of government. People who are looking to unduly influence government officials to support their particular cause can also corrupt a system that works best when actions are transparent and all potentially affected parties are brought into the debate. Government in the sunshine trumps government in smoke filled back rooms any day.

If most people initially enter government service for the right reasons, what goes wrong?

It's really not that different from how, and why, people are corrupted in other professions - knocking heads against those in power (politics), frustration in getting anything done (bureaucracy), and good old fashioned greed. In addition, it becomes so much easier to justify going down the wrong path, when everyone else is doing it. Once you get away with it once, it becomes so much easier the second and third time.

I mentioned one of those situations in my discussion of Issue #2 - Balanced Budgets and Deficits. Five US Senators, including John McCain, met privately with Federal regulators in an attempt to dissuade the regulators from continuing their investigation into Savings & Loan executive, Charles Keating. In any case, two of the Senators, John McCain and John Glenn, were given a lesser reprimand as their participation was deemed to be more being in the wrong place at the wrong time. For those who would like to know more of the story, you can go to John McCain's own account included in his book, Worth the Fighting For (Chapter 8) or for on the web you can go to: http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/mccain/articles/2007/03/01/20070301mccainbio-chapter7.html.

As I stated before, it is not the transgression which concerns me as much as McCain's failure to learn an important lesson from his mistake. While researching my book on the Enron debacle, another equally massive bankruptcy took place within a month of Enron's filing. Global Crossing was a telecommunications company whose facts were remarkably similar to those of Enron. I discovered that the US Senator who received the most amount of campaign contributions from Global Crossings was also the chairman of the subcommittee who oversaw the telecommunications industry. That senator was John McCain.

Why should I expect different behavior from John McCain then from others facing similar situations?

After eight years of perhaps the most secretive administration in history (Richard Nixon wasn't in office that long), I just do.This country needs it. This country deserves it.

John McCain had the opportunity to provide that kind of leadership and at times has met the challenge. His support of campaign finance reform was an example of trying to reform a system that rewarded undue monetary influence. The Republican leadership fought him every step of the way and the bill that eventually emerged did little to provide a meaningful impact. His opposition to special interest legislation has been largely ineffective as opposition from both parties blocked the way.

Why do I believe that Barack Obama will be more effective in providing a more ethical administration?

To fully understand my answer, I encourage all of you (those who support John McCain and those who support Barack Obama) to read his book, The Audacity of Hope. I am truly surprised and disappointed at how many political junkies have not read the biographies of either of the two major candidates running for President of the United States. I have read both of John McCain's books and nearly two years ago read Barack Obama's, Audacity of Hope. For those of you who are only peripherally interested in Presidential politics, I've got news for you. You wouldn't be reading my blog if that were true. So why not be more fully informed about the men who may be the next President of the United States.

Anyway, I was enthralled by Barack Obama's book. Just as his keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic convention could have been delivered at the Republican convention, the book outlined a philosophy for the country that broke through partisan rhetoric. It was a broad-based statement of goals for the future of this country. Obama has recognized the complexity of many of the difficult issues that have separated the people in our country, while laying out a framework for us to move forward together in reaching a workable consensus. The harsh and divisive rhetoric of race, faith, and equal opportunity are replaced with thoughtful terminology most Americans can agree on.

As a State Senator in Illinois, Barack Obama helped pass ethics reform legislation and one of the first bills he introduced as a US Senator was ethics legislation patterned after that same ethics legislation. Although that bill did not pass, Senator Obama helped the Senate to pass the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act, a comprehensive ethics and lobbying reform bill, by a 96-2 vote.

Certainly, it is easy to question the extent of the track record Barack Obama has when it comes to ethics in government. But his attempts during the campaign and Presidential debates to lower the volume of the partisan rhetoric are a welcome relief. I was also impressed by the speech given by a former government official, Dennis Ross, who has worked for both Democratic and Republican administrations, that Barack Obama is the first politician he has seen who so quickly grasps the nuances of foreign and domestic policies. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqMpHOLxvYc. Like Ronald Reagan he has the ability to gain the trust of those he meets in a very short period oftime.

With all that is going on in the world today, trust is an important asset.

On the issue of ethics in government, I choose Barack Obama .

Reader Comments	Comments RSS
Comments are closed for this post.

No comments have been written yet.

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.