You are here
A Regional Solution to Regional Corruption
Tuesday, December 18th, 2012
Robert Wechsler
In February, I wrote seven
blog posts applying some of the concepts and practices of
nonviolence to the field of government ethics. This is effectively
an eighth post. This time the inspiration is not a book, but the
latest issue of the journal New Routes, entitled "Peace
Without Borders: Regional Peacebuilding in Focus."
This issue takes recognition of the fact that war does not occur in isolation in only one country. Political and ethnic leaders of neighboring countries are often involved, either militarily or through providing money and arms. If wars are regional, then peace solutions must also be regional. Europe is the best example of success in regional cooperation not only to bring about peace, but to institutionalize it so that war is almost impossible.
The same is often true of government ethics.
Illinois is an excellent example. Although it is Chicago that is famous for ethical misconduct, many of the cities, counties, and towns around it have terrible ethics records, and the state is also a mess. Misconduct occurs among politicians in the same party organizations, and these politicians go from one level of government to another (in office and on party committees), as well as in and out of government, lobbying, and business, across all borders. The contractors and developers that cause problems in one city cause the same problems in other cities and counties in the state. Like war, ethical misconduct does not respect borders.
Even if reformers are successful in getting one city a first-rate ethics program, the city's officials will be tempted by the same people as before, will be colleagues of the same people on party and regional committees, and will be given money by PACs and party committees outside the jurisdiction. And to the extent city officials get involved in ethical misconduct outside the city's borders, there is usually little the ethics program can do.
This is one of many reasons a regional or state ethics program, if it is independent and comprehensive, can be better than a city, county, or town program, especially in regions where corruption is rampant and local officials insist on control of the ethics programs.
It is naive to act as if everything that happens in a community originates in the community and stays in the community. Communities are not islands. And if they are not islands, ethics programs should also not be islands. If they must be separate (by law or unwillingness of legislative bodies to cooperate or give up power over ethics programs), ethics programs should cooperate. They should train their ethics commissions together, have annual meetings to discuss common issues they face, hand matters over to each other when ethics commission members have conflicts, and seek out advice from each other when problems arise.
See the regional ethics program and the state-level solution sections of my free e-book Local Government Ethics Programs.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
This issue takes recognition of the fact that war does not occur in isolation in only one country. Political and ethnic leaders of neighboring countries are often involved, either militarily or through providing money and arms. If wars are regional, then peace solutions must also be regional. Europe is the best example of success in regional cooperation not only to bring about peace, but to institutionalize it so that war is almost impossible.
The same is often true of government ethics.
Illinois is an excellent example. Although it is Chicago that is famous for ethical misconduct, many of the cities, counties, and towns around it have terrible ethics records, and the state is also a mess. Misconduct occurs among politicians in the same party organizations, and these politicians go from one level of government to another (in office and on party committees), as well as in and out of government, lobbying, and business, across all borders. The contractors and developers that cause problems in one city cause the same problems in other cities and counties in the state. Like war, ethical misconduct does not respect borders.
Even if reformers are successful in getting one city a first-rate ethics program, the city's officials will be tempted by the same people as before, will be colleagues of the same people on party and regional committees, and will be given money by PACs and party committees outside the jurisdiction. And to the extent city officials get involved in ethical misconduct outside the city's borders, there is usually little the ethics program can do.
This is one of many reasons a regional or state ethics program, if it is independent and comprehensive, can be better than a city, county, or town program, especially in regions where corruption is rampant and local officials insist on control of the ethics programs.
It is naive to act as if everything that happens in a community originates in the community and stays in the community. Communities are not islands. And if they are not islands, ethics programs should also not be islands. If they must be separate (by law or unwillingness of legislative bodies to cooperate or give up power over ethics programs), ethics programs should cooperate. They should train their ethics commissions together, have annual meetings to discuss common issues they face, hand matters over to each other when ethics commission members have conflicts, and seek out advice from each other when problems arise.
See the regional ethics program and the state-level solution sections of my free e-book Local Government Ethics Programs.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
