Government Officials' Charities -- Secretive and Easy to Corrupt
I've written a few times about the ways local government officials
misuse charitable organizations (<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/239" target="”_blank”">1</a>, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/568" target="”_blank”">2</a>, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/536" target="”_blank”">3</a>, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/349" target="”_blank”">4</a>, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/443" target="”_blank”">5</a>). But there are still
charities-related issues I've missed.<br>
<br>
At a session at the recent <a href="www.cogel.org" target="”_blank”">Council on Governmental Ethics Laws (COGEL)</a>
conference on loopholes in and end runs around campaign finance laws,
David Morrison of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform emphasized
the fact that contributions to and expenditures by nonprofits normally
need not be disclosed (anyone who gives may ask to be listed as
Anonymous). This makes charities the perfect black box for making
contributions or gifts to a government official through his favorite
charity or a charity over which the official has some influence, either
as a board member, through a family member or close associate, or even
as a founder, for example, in <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/568" target="”_blank”">the case o</a>f Rep. Charles
Rangel's Rangel School of Public Service.<br>
<br>
Few organizations will out their own donors, because this would
seriously affect their ability to get donations. When a government
official puts a charitable organization in the position of effectively
conspiring with donors and the official to hide what are effectively
gifts for the purpose of political influence, the official is not only
undermining the spirit of campaign finance laws, but also corrupting
the people who work for the organization. As with <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/582" target="”_blank”">corrupting subordinates</a>,
the corruption through co-opting of charity employees and board members
is inexcusable.<br>
<br>
At the same panel, Bob Stern of the <a href="www.cgs.org" target="”_blank”">Center
for Governmental Studies</a> presented a draft model law on payments
influencing candidates and elected officials, which would place the
burden of proof on candidates with respect to contributions to
organizations over which the candidate has "significant influence."
This is not limited to charities, but also includes legal defense funds,
inaugural committees, and the like.<br>
<br>
Government officials who have significant influence over a charity
should be bending over backwards not to allow any of the charity's
employees or board members compromise themselves.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>