Summer Reading: Corruption and American Politics - Michael Johnston's Essay

Anonymous

Tue, 08/21/2012 - 11:17

Book Reviews

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Corruption-American-Politics-Michael-Genovese/dp/…; target="”_blank”">Corruption and American Politics</a>, an essay collection edited by Michael
A. Genovese and Victoria A. Farrar-Myers (Cambria, 2011), has some
excellent essays, especially those that deal with institutional
corruption. The only serious criticism I have of the book is its
price: $30 in both paperback and e-book formats. 
 
Michael A. Genovese's introduction focuses on what he calls
"systemic corruption," a bad system rather than bad apples. "Such
corruption," he writes, "runs deeper than mere individual
transgression. Systemic corruption is embedded into the day-to-day
operation of the system. ... It is easier and, in the short run,
more gratifying to catch, punish, and condemn a Governor
Blagojevich."

He notes that Michael Johnston, the author most quoted in the essays
of this collection, feels that focusing on the personal instead of
the systemic has led to a blind spot regarding corruption. This is
not a theoretical blind spot, any more than officials' blind spots
(which I discuss at length in my book <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/files/lgep1-0%20-%20Robert%20Wechsler.htm#Bli…; target="”_blank”">Local Government Ethics Programs</a>). Blind spots regarding corruption
lead to "misguided reform efforts." 
 
It is Michael Johnston's essay "Democracy without Politics: Hidden
Costs of Corruption and Reform in America" that leads off the
collection. He states his principal argument as follows:<blockquote>

[S]everal types of ambivalence — toward self-interest, relationships
between public and private concerns, and toward politics itself —
have produced both a number of blind spots with respect to politics,
leadership, and the significance of corruption, and a naïve
overreliance on rules and institutional remedies as means of reform.</blockquote>

Inclusion and Access 
Johnston's concerns about corruption are focused on inclusion. When
most people feel excluded from access to their leaders, and believe
that officials have been bought off by special interests, a
democracy has a significant corruption problem. Johnston's concerns
focus less on conflicts of interest than on special interests, which
are more relevant to lobbying and campaign finance. 
 
The Ambiguity of "Corruption" and "Abuse" 
Like many of the authors in this collection, Johnston is interested
in the definition of corruption (on the other hand, I try to keep
away from the word as much as possible, because people define it in
so many different ways, most of them related to crimes). He defines
corruption as "the abuse of public roles or resources for private
benefit," a common definition that ignores the criminal aspect. What differentiates his approach is
that he feels that "abuse," "public," "private," and even "benefit"
are often "matters of contention and ambiguity." 
 
For example, because there is disagreement over the boundary between
"public" and "private" (e.g., in public-private partnerships,
development agencies, and the privatization of local government
services), these relatively recent institutions may not be
sufficiently protected from corruption, and there may be
insufficient oversight or countervailing forces, political or
administrative. This is certainly true. 
 
Sometimes the disagreement is over what is and is not "abuse." Often
elected officials do not feel that their conduct constitutes abuse (and therefore leave it out of the ethics codes they pass),
while the public does. This can allow damaging corruption to occur
without there being any bad apples. 
 
What is most important to Johnston is that these definition issues
are never resolved. They are dealt with via politics and scandals,
that is, through accusations and ethics and criminal proceedings. He
feels this is fine. I disagree. 
 
I don't think this is an effective way to deal with these issues,
because what is presented as being about ethics is too often really
about partisan and personal animosity, and the desire for victory at
any cost. Even when officials are sincere about resolving ethics
issues, they often do not understand them or have blind spots that
prevent them from properly seeing and dealing with misconduct. And
sometimes elected officials defend themselves by attacking or
undermining government ethics programs, dealing a serious blow to
the public's trust both in those who lead their community and in the
ethics program that was supposed to provide accountability. 
 
The Moral Health of a Community 
Johnston notes that looking for bad apples has not always been seen
as the best way to deal with corruption. Classical thinkers, he
writes, saw corruption as reflecting the moral health of a
community. It was a reflection of the relationships between leaders
and followers. He sees J. Patrick Dobel, author of the book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Public-Integrity-J-Patrick-Dobel/dp/0801869161/">…
Integrity</a>, as summing up this view in his argument that the
"privatization of moral concerns and the accompanying breakdown of
civic loyalty and virtue are the cardinal attributes of a corrupt
state." 
 
People tend to think along these lines, focused less on individuals
than on "the basic soundness and credibility of politics and
leaders." But at the same time the public and the news media gets
caught up in scandals involving individuals. And, most important to
Johnston, people are unwilling to commit their energies to
government reform or active oversight. We instead depend on
institutional arrangements such as checks and balances, nonpolitical
administration, and campaign finance laws to check the excesses of
politics, even when we feel they aren't really working. 
 
Special Access Is Anti-Competitive 
Johnston sees the political world in terms of markets, but not in
the usual, simplistic view of companies in competition. He pictures
the payments of companies seeking benefits from government for
influence and access as a way of decreasing political competition by
getting special consideration while competitors (other industries or
companies in the same industry) get less or no consideration, unless
of course they pay an equivalent price. 
 
Similarly, elected officials who accept the most money from these
companies, legally or illegally, are in a good position to beat
their competitors – especially non-incumbents. Johnston believes
that what is needed is not insulation from self-interest, but
instead more politics and more accountability through more equal
elections. Unfortunately, his solution is campaign finance-oriented,
providing little guidance for local government ethics. 
 
Turpitude and Power 
Johnston includes a very interesting quote from Alexis de
Tocqueville's classic book Democracy in America about how we view our political
leaders:<blockquote>

[We fear] not so much the immorality of the great as the fact that
immorality may lead to greatness. In a democracy, private citizens
see a man of their own rank in life who rises from that obscure
position in a few years to riches and power; the spectacle excites
their surprise and envy, and they are led to inquire how a person
who is yesterday their equal is today their ruler. To attribute his
rise to his talents or his virtues is unpleasant, for it is tacitly
to acknowledge that they are themselves less virtuous or less
talented than he was. They are therefore led, and often rightly, to
impute his success mainly to some of his vices; and an odious
connection is thus formed between the ideas of turpitude and power,
unworthiness and success, utility and dishonor.</blockquote>

Things haven't changed much in this respect since 1840. As Johnston
writes, "people's connections to top figures in politics are
fundamentally emotional ...." This is one reason why it is so
important to have ethics issues handled rationally by a clearly
independent body that does not appear to be protecting high-level
officials and their colleagues and supporters. Otherwise, ethics
issues are dealt with and seen in a primarily emotional manner, even if
there is lots of talk about laws. 
 
Robert Wechsler 
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics 
 
---

Search

Summer Reading: Corruption and American Politics - Michael Johnston's Essay

Tags

Share This Page