Topic: 1st Amendment
Would you let a fox guard your hen houses? Why do we sit and watch Congress judge itself when it comes to questions of ethics and corruption? Are we really that naive?by Dave Stancliff
(libertarian)
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Would you let a fox guard your hen houses?
By Dave Stancliff Would you leave a fox to guard your prize chickens?
How about having a boy scout troop provide security at Fort Knox for a weekend?
Or, would you put prisoners in charge of running a prison, and deciding how long their terms there would be?
Then why do we sit and just watch Congress judge itself when it comes to questions of ethics and corruption? Is it because we believe our elected representatives can objectively sit in judgement of each other? Are we really that naive?
Even a casual observer of politics has enough common sense to realize that something is wrong with how the system monitors itself. If you have ever done any jury duty you know that one of the first questions a judge asks you is, "Do you know the defendant?"
When you acknowledge that you do, the judge points at the door and says, "Goodbye." But suppose the judge told you that it was okay if you knew the accused then proceeded with the trial? Would you honestly think it was going to be a fair trial, as the jury box filled up with friends and colleagues of the accused? Probably not.
So why can't we do something about our lawmakers who seem to weasel around the finer points of the law when it comes to their peers? It's like when a police officer is accused of something and the, "blue line," draws around him protectively, guilty or not.
Putting this unethical situation into context let's see how the system currently works.
Both the House and Senate have ethics committees, which may come as a surprise to some who have never heard of them taking any action. These committees are composed of lawmakers who are supposed to investigate misconduct by their colleagues.
Some of these committee members are powerful and they hand out million dollar projects to like-minded cronies. Or, they pass out other fat committee assignments, and even career-making perks. Remember the fox watching the hens? I don't see much difference here.
These so-called investigative committees are notoriously slow to bring any inquiries against their co-workers, and are even slower to conclude them. Recommendations ordering tough sanctions are as rare as rabid Dodo birds.
Does anyone reading this believe that our elected officials in Congress are above reproach and that they never indulge in corrupt practices? If you do here's some smelling salts and when you wake up check out the latest headlines from our worthies in Congress.
In just the last two years we've had two high profile lawmakers-former representatives Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., and Bob Ney, R-Ohio- go to jail after lengthy corruption investigations that cost the taxpayers plenty.
Only after years of overwhelming evidence did these two political stalwarts finally get their just desserts. We can look at Rep. William Jefferson, D-LA., and Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz, who are currently under indictment, for some recent examples of greed and corruption.
Meanwhile, not a word from the House ethics panel. Their very silence is damning. What about the other ethics panel in the Senate? It's track record is no better. Just look how fast they moved in admonishing (Feb. 13, 2008) Sen. Leader Larry Craig, R-Idaho who got caught in an airport sex sting last summer!
.Wonder of wonders then that last year senators-of which three are under current investigations-overwhelmingly voted 71-27 to reject a proposed independent office of public integrity. Why would they change a system that basically grants them immunity from prosecutions regardless of their crimes?
Those House Democrats who took office last year, because they promised an end to the corrupt current system, have proposed a new system that would let a board of six independent outsiders look into our lawmakers misconduct.
The Republicans, who don't like anything not Republican, have already moved to sabotage that plan by making another proposal that some Democrats just might go for. Crony baloney as usual.
As It Stands, as long as we let the foxes watch the hen houses, expect some casualties.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 8 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Dave Stancliff only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Dave Stancliff is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
I agree, Dave. Ethics is an important issue that many leaders and business people in our country choose to ignore. They believe they can lie about what they are doing and "manage" outcomes, but there is a higher power that some day, even they will have to answer to. Unethical behavior runs rampant in many professions. I've witnessed it myself and it is amazing at what people get away with.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
