It's Gray Between the Cracks
Gifts to a local official can fall between jurisdictional cracks, as
shown in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/07/nyregion/tech-magnates-bet-on-booker-…; target="”_blank”">an
article today in the New York <i>Times</i></a>. They can also fall between
definitional cracks. And between these cracks it's gray.<br>
<br>
The article reports that, a couple of years ago, Newark NJ's mayor, Cory Booker, who is running
for U.S. Senate, was given money by several high-tech executives to
found a high-tech company.<br>
<br>
The definitional issue is whether the mayor received gifts. The money was not
given to the mayor, but to a company in which he has a financial
interest. And the money was not given, but invested. What was
actually given to the mayor was not money, but the opportunity to
make money and the opportunity, even if he doesn't make money, to
have a high-tech company without having to do much of the work
(since he has a full-time job and lacks much of the necessary
expertise or experience).<br>
<br>
These are not your typical gifts. But it would certainly not be
stretching the definition too far to consider them gifts. They certainly have the appearance of being gifts.<br>
<br>
The jurisdictional issue (which is partly also a definitional issue)
involves the fact that the gift givers are not restricted sources.
That is, they are (presumably) not seeking any special benefit from the city of
Newark, nor are they or their companies regulated by the city. Gift
bans are not designed to prevent gifts from people whose gifts would
not even appear to be bribes, at least with respect to the government the official is serving.<br>
<br>
What these people want in return for their generosity is not
something from the mayor of Newark, but something from a future U.S.
Senator, or other high position if Booker is not successful in this election. In fact, the transaction would be better for Booker if Booker were not elected this
year. This is a special election, being held because the prior
holder of the position died in office. To the extent the transaction was a gift, it would have been expected that the
business would be going strong by the time Booker reached higher
office, and that he could then sell his interest in it, to his
benefit, which would likely be required by law. At this point, the company is
going nowhere.<br>
<br>
Until Booker does achieve higher office, the investments in his
company and any benefits he gets from them are not illegal. But they
create an appearance that high-tech executives are trying to buy his
support for their goals, or reward him for
his very public support for social media and its interests. This
support has little to do with his position as mayor, but it is his
position as mayor that has put him in the public light, so that his
support matters.<br>
<br>
In other words, it's gray in this place between the cracks. And where there's gray, it's best to steer clear.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---