You are here
The Use of Subordinates as Means and Benefitting a Personal Interest
Saturday, October 11th, 2008
Robert Wechsler
According to an
article in today's New York Times and in yesterday's
Huffington Post, the investigator charged by Alaska's Legislative
Committee, before Sarah Palin was even being considered as a vice
presidential candidate, found in a report
that, among other things, Gov. Palin abused her power by violating the
following provision of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act:
The most important language in the report is as follows:
The pesonal benefit involved was the firing of Palin's brother-in-law, a state police officer named Wooten, who was in the midst of a messy divorce with Palin's sister.
I would like to emphasize something said by the public safety commissioner, who oversaw the state police, in an interview last night:
Too often, conflicts of interest are about officials acting selfishly, putting their own self-interest ahead of the public interest. But worse than this is putting subordinates in a position where they might be fired for putting the public interest first, or for trying to get their superior to act appropriately. This is what happened to the public safety commissioner, and this is what might have happened to the governor's subordinates had they refused to do her bidding.
This is government by fear. It's not about public trust, it's about treating people with dignity, about not using people as means. This is a different problem than conflicts of interest, and arguably a more serious one. It undermines democracy in a more insidious and deeper way. And it is usually not an isolated instance, but part of a pattern, as I discussed in a recent blog entry about Gov. Palin. People who use others as means cannot take No as an answer, can often not even see the public interest in a particular situation, because their personal goal is the only end they see. It might be the best thing, but it is often achieved in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons. And worst of all, it corrupts others.
It is one thing to be corrupt. It is inexcusable to corrupt others, especially through fear. This is not how power in a democracy should be used or, as the report says, abused.
We are fortunate to have this message come across through association with someone so much in the public eye. Unfortunately, the situation itself is being abused for political purposes. The worst response came from Palin's attorney:
The ethics act clearly refers to "personal or financial interest." And in any event, how could anyone argue that it is okay to use subordinates to get personal revenge on someone? Financial gain may be central to criminal corruption, but not to ethics (although sadly too many local governments define a conflict of interest solely in financial terms). This is another great opportunity here: to see how corrupting personal interests can be. Maybe local governments will take notice of this.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
The legislature reaffirms that each
public officer holds office as a public trust, and any effort to
benefit a personal or financial interest through official action is a
violation of that trust.
The most important language in the report is as follows:
Such impermissible and repeated
contacts create conflicts of interests for subordinate employees who
must choose to either please a superior or run the risk of facing that
superior’s displeasure and the possible consequences of that
displeasure.
The pesonal benefit involved was the firing of Palin's brother-in-law, a state police officer named Wooten, who was in the midst of a messy divorce with Palin's sister.
I would like to emphasize something said by the public safety commissioner, who oversaw the state police, in an interview last night:
I was resisting the governor from the
very beginning on the Wooten matter to protect her from exactly what
just happened to her here, being found to have acted inappropriately.
Too often, conflicts of interest are about officials acting selfishly, putting their own self-interest ahead of the public interest. But worse than this is putting subordinates in a position where they might be fired for putting the public interest first, or for trying to get their superior to act appropriately. This is what happened to the public safety commissioner, and this is what might have happened to the governor's subordinates had they refused to do her bidding.
This is government by fear. It's not about public trust, it's about treating people with dignity, about not using people as means. This is a different problem than conflicts of interest, and arguably a more serious one. It undermines democracy in a more insidious and deeper way. And it is usually not an isolated instance, but part of a pattern, as I discussed in a recent blog entry about Gov. Palin. People who use others as means cannot take No as an answer, can often not even see the public interest in a particular situation, because their personal goal is the only end they see. It might be the best thing, but it is often achieved in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons. And worst of all, it corrupts others.
It is one thing to be corrupt. It is inexcusable to corrupt others, especially through fear. This is not how power in a democracy should be used or, as the report says, abused.
We are fortunate to have this message come across through association with someone so much in the public eye. Unfortunately, the situation itself is being abused for political purposes. The worst response came from Palin's attorney:
In order to violate the ethics law,
there has to be some personal gain, usually financial. Mr. Branchflower [the investigator]
has failed to identify any financial gain.
The ethics act clearly refers to "personal or financial interest." And in any event, how could anyone argue that it is okay to use subordinates to get personal revenge on someone? Financial gain may be central to criminal corruption, but not to ethics (although sadly too many local governments define a conflict of interest solely in financial terms). This is another great opportunity here: to see how corrupting personal interests can be. Maybe local governments will take notice of this.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
