Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Political corruption
Politicians and corruption
Politicians and corruption
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Political corruption
Corruption is an individual and institutional process where there is a gain by a public official from a briber and in return receives a service. Between the gain and the service, there is an improper connection, (Thompson p.28). The two major categories of bribery is individual and institutional corruption. Receiving personal goods for the pursuit of one’s own benefit is personal fraud. An example of individual distortion is the financial scandal involving David Durenberger. Organizational corruption involves “receiving goods that are useable primarily in the political process and are necessary for doing a job or are essential by-products of doing it,” (Thompson p.30). An instance of institutional fraud is the Keating Five case. There are also times where there is a mixture of both individual and organizational corruption in a scandal. An example of this diverse combination is James C. Wright Jr. actions while he was the Speaker of the House.
To avoid further political corruption, Thompson advocates for legislative ethics. The three principles are independence, fairness, and accountability. In Thompson’s terms, independence means “a member should act on reasons relevant to the merits of public policies or reasons relevant to advancing a process that encourages acting on such reasons,” (Thompson p.20). Fairness is officials following organizational regulations. Finally, accountability is a politician keeping public confidence in them. This paper will show that Thompson’s principles are qualified guidelines that legislators should follow. Individual and institutional corruption can decrease if politicians adhere to Thompson’s three principles of independence, fairness, and accountability.
Individual fraud occurs when a legisl...
... middle of paper ...
...ls are convincing as guidelines that legislators should follow. These values promote integrity that has been lacking in Congress. Since a politician is an individual, outside influences should not overpower his or her decision-making process. In addition, fairness forces lawmakers to play by the rules. Lastly, politicians must be accountable to the citizens that they represent because they need to be protecting their interests. These three principles force politicians to follow the morals of the “American democratic tradition,” (Thompson p.24-25).
Individual and political corruption has been a part of American democracy process for too long. The United States government needs to promote Thompson’s three principles to bring ethics back to the American system. If politicians were independent, fair, and accountable, then the legislative system would be more ethical.
Realizing Ethical Issues Helps You Avoid Unethical Behaviors In this age of change, the human society is progressing rapidly on various fields. However, the ethical problems are becoming increasingly severe. According to the teaching notes of “In It To Win: The Jack Abramoff Story,” “During the Bush Administration, Abramoff was the most influential lobbyist in Washington, D.C. His excesses led to his downfall and that of Congress members with whom he was closely connected, including aides, business associates, government officials, and lawmakers.”
By the mid 20th century, the scale and prominence of corruption had increased dramatically, due to the widespread transition to vast urban cities and industrialized systems. The greed and desperation that resulted from the shift towards industrialism accelerated the growth of corruption in politics. Although the shift to industry was a necessary stepping stone in the development of the modern society existing today, it was accompanied by various consequences to American society and facilitated the corruption of government officials. The exploitation of fellow
Mann and Norman J. Ornstein argue that the Legislative branch is the most broken branch of government. Congress was designed by the Framers of the Constitution of the United States to be an independent and powerful party. The Framers wanted the Legislative branch to represent the vast diversity of people of the United States, to deliberate on important issues and policies, and to check and balance the other branches. However, Congress’s role in the American Constitutional System differs from the part it was meant to play. The authors argue that Congress has failed to fill its responsibilities to the people of the United States because of the division of the Democratic and Republican parties, which leaves little room for compromise and negotiation. Members of Congress focus on their own needs and interests, and will travel to far lengths to prove that their political party is the most powerful. Congress has turned a blind eye to the needs of the American people. Congress cannot succeed in getting the United States back on track unless they start to follow the rules dictated by the Framers of the Constitution. A vast series of decisions made by Congress, driven by Congress’s disregard for institutional procedures, its tendency to focus on personal ethics, and the overpowering culture of corruption, led to Congress failing to implement important changes in the United States
When dealing with corruption, first question to ask or to clarify is what corruption is. NSW Research (2002) describes corruption anything from gaining materialistically by virtue of position (for eg. getting a special discount at stores) to engaging in ‘direct criminal activities’ (eg. selling drugs). Newburn (1999) believes that there is a thin line between the definition of ‘corrupt’ and ‘non-corrupt’ activities as at the end, it is an ethical problem. For common people, however, bribery generalises corruption.
Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).
The Constitution of California expects legislators, which includes both State’s senate and House of Representatives, to influence agency decision making, to build political support for increases or decreases in agency funding to lay the political foundation for new programs and policies, and to capture media attention and enhance the power of the California State Congress members. However, not all legislators are able to fulfill their duties and comply with the state’s expectations. Indeed, their efficacy to serve California varies on the length of their experience, familiarity to government system, and commitment to public service. Evaluating their performances for the past ten years, legislators can be distinguished by their competence and efficiency. In this paper, I argue that to be an outstanding legislator, it is necessary for politicians to satisfy both constituents’ and partisan’s interests, and to have strong ability to facilitate bargaining and compromise within the state congress.
Though the intent of a voter is based off their own individual opinions, the same virtues may be found with lobbyists. Like previously mentioned, the lobbyist must be passionate in order to truly persuade. Because of the opportunity to manipulate and bribe politicians to their side, there are regulations to try to prevent corruption. ...
In Lee Hamilton’s article entitled The Case for Congress, Hamilton analyzes the criticisms Congress often receives from Citizens of the United States. He points out the negative traits that are often associated with those serving in Congress such as personal scandals, immoral lobbying, and greed. In reality, Hamilton expresses, congressmen are not the monsters that the media oftentimes portrays them to be. This article is not justifying all acts carried out by Congress, but simply identifies positive things that the men and women serving in the United States Congress do in order to help their constituents.
Corruption is a persistent problem that plagues the world and it knows no boundaries. Transparency International defines it as the “abuse of entrusted power for private gain” (2013). For the purposes of this thread, ‘corruption’ is defined as any individual, collective, or structural act or process that permits the use of public authority or position for private gain. This definition captures the broad and many ways individuals and institutions abuse power and the public trust. In regard to whistleblowing, much conflict stems from the context in which the whistleblower is viewed.
Many people argue that the legislative branch is run by few big interest groups because of their massive contributions against very small contributions from individuals. In a democratic society, power must be shared equally among its citizens, but is that the case in the United States? The answer is simply no, and by limiting their overall spending on elections, policymakers will listen and pay more attention to the public interest over the special interest. Also, by revealing the freeloaders’ names, people will have more knowledge of who is representing them and who has tended to benefit those who made contributions to their campaigns. Finally, prohibiting the spending on food, entertainment and gifts to legislative branch employee will also reduce the corruption in the legislative
Our political system has always been incorporated with corruption; it is functional to the system. The system’s flawed manner is to reproduce itself. Corruption has plagued society. It is the torment of the people, the land weeping, and the disorder of society. These three political leaders started off with accomplishments that were great and benefited our nation. But all three were overshadowed by their mistakes and scandals. This in fact has led to my conclusion that history does not repeat itself but instead counterpart each other that each led to suffering.
Known as a period of political scandal, many politicians engaged in bribes, lies, and abuse of power to further a political, social, and often personal agenda. The typical corrupt leader "will sell his vote for a dollar [...] turns with indifference from the voice of honesty and reason [...] his unalienable right may be valuable to him for the bribe he gets out of it" (166). Such politicians are an injustice to society because as they are elected by the people, they must act towards the betterment of the people, rather than for themselves. Furthermore, those who elect this politician to office merely underestimate their political and social responsibility because they "want the feeling that their own interests are connected with those of the community, and in the weakness or absence of moral and political duty" (167). Thus, under the control of the ruthless politician and the reckless voter, the true essence of democracy is
As Dworkin introduces his idea of political integrity, he begins by introducing his conception of three political ideals: fairness, justice, and procedural due process. According to his claims, a utopian society would only need these ideals to thrive because officials consistently doing what was perfectly just and fair would guarantee coherence. In our system of ordinary politics, Dworkin feels that integrity need be accepted as a fourth political ideal, if we accept it at all. In his definition of political integrity, Dworkin claims that it ought to be used to treat like cases alike, provide equality under the law, be parallel to personal integrity, and demand that the state act on a single set of consistent principles. In layman’s terms, the characterization of political integrity implies total equality under the law by all laws being justified by the same principles. Still though, he finds it important to make the assertion that it may well be the case that some “breaches” of integrity are, all things considered, better than the alternatives. Dworkin claims that we have two separate principles regarding political integrity. These principles, legislative and adjudication, try to make laws morally coherent, and allow them to be seen in such a manner. Also, when speaking of political integrity, he makes two important background assumptions. These background assumptions are that we all, as a society, believe in political fairness and that we know that different people hold different view about moral issues that they all treat as of great importance. From these assumptions and principles, Dworkin presents an interesting view of political compromise in the form of checkerboard laws.
The difference between ethics and morals, between unethical conduct and immoral behavior, is significant with regards to the actions of elected officials. Elected officials should be obliged to live with ethical conduct but necessary moral behavior. Obligating elected officials to live ethically exemplary lives with regards to their profession is appropriate because the officials are elected into their government positions by the nation's or region's citizens. Those denizens expect their officials to abide by the region's own ethics, by “well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ough...
Montesh, M. (n.d.). Conceptualizing Corruption: Forms, Causes, Types and Consequences. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from