Nepotism Isn't About Kennedys
What stronger personal interest is there than family relationships? And
yet so many people don't get the problems nepotism in government poses,
at least until it takes a chunk out of their wallets.<br>
<br>
Take <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/weekinreview/21murphy.html" target="”_blank”">an
article</a> in today's New York <span>Times</span>
Week in Review section. In looking at the stew going on over filling
Hillary Clinton's Senate seat, with the two principal candidates being
a Kennedy and the son of a governor formerly married to a Kennedy (for
those too young to remember, Bobby Kennedy was once a U.S. Senator from
New York), the author misconstrues nepotism in government into
something having to do with elected dynasties.<br>
<br>
Adam Bellow, author of <span>In Praise of
Nepotism</span> and son of the great novelist Saul Bellow, is quoted as
saying that the American creed is "we want nepotism for ourselves but
not for other people." No, we love to see athletes' and actors'
children succeed, and we have no problems with children going into
parents' businesses or professions (as long as they do the work and
don't drive the businesses into the ground).<br>
<br>
But with governnment it's different, and not the way Mary Jo Murphy
says it is: "Here our bent noses catch nepotism's whiff. Here we think
we should be outraged, or at least offended. Shouldn't we?"<br>
<br>
People aren't outraged or offended at all about members of dynasties
being elected. Either Andrew Cuomo or Caroline Kennedy could easily be
elected, unless they ran against each other, because, like any product,
their names have great recognition value, which is itself a sort of
incumbency. Electing someone based on their family relationship is an
issue of fairness, really, and of what sort of system we want, an
aristocracy or a democracy. I think most Americans are happy with an
aristocracy, in a modern form (I am not).<br>
<br>
But nepotism is something different. Nepotism is when one family member
hires or appoints another family member (Governor Patterson is neither
a Kennedy nor a Cuomo, although he is a member of a minor dynasty of
his own) or supervises another family member (Ted Kennedy may be the
Lion of the Senate, but he wouldn't be supervising his niece Caroline).<br>
<br>
What happened in my town shows why nepotism is a problem beyond
fairness and aristocracy. A town government department head married a
member of his staff, and she became his assistant department head.
Years later it turned out (or so the State's Attorney's office has
alleged) that they were playing all sorts of games with travel
expenses, overtime, and cash.<br>
<br>
And how many people want to work for a married couple? I did it once,
and one would play me (and others) off against the other member of the
couple. A marriage defines the workplace. And so can other family
relationships.<br>
<br>
Allowing this to happen is to allow the official's personal interest to
override the public interest. That's what nepotism is: putting personal interest ahead of the public interest, demonstrating that government is for those who run it, not for citizens. People who go in for nepotism are prone to other unethical conduct, as well.<br>
<br>
Local government has its Kennedys and Cuomos, but if that's who people
want to vote for, there's little that can be done about it. However,
local government should not have its married couples running
departments. Or its little Kennedys or Cuomos waiting to take over the
family agency. That's why <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/mc/full#TOC44" target="”_blank”">nepotism provisions</a>
are an important part of an ethics code. In my town, it's the provision
people most want to add.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>