Corruption in American Politics: Congress and Corruption in American Politics: Congress and ElectionsElections

Eric M. UslanerEric M. Uslaner

Professor of Government and PoliticsProfessor of Government and Politics

University of Maryland--College ParkUniversity of Maryland--College Park

College Park, MD 20742College Park, MD 20742

euslaner@gvpt.umd.edueuslaner@gvpt.umd.edu

http://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/uslanerhttp://www.bsos.umd.edu/gvpt/uslaner

How Corrupt is the United States?How Corrupt is the United States?

In the 19th and early 20th century, many In the 19th and early 20th century, many writers saw American politics as filled writers saw American politics as filled with corruption.with corruption.

Books such as "The Robber Barons" Books such as "The Robber Barons" detailed how big business, such as detailed how big business, such as railroads, was widely corrupt.railroads, was widely corrupt.

Journalists such as Lincoln Steffens, who Journalists such as Lincoln Steffens, who called themselves "muckrakers," exposed called themselves "muckrakers," exposed corrupt politicians and business people.corrupt politicians and business people.

Corruption was strongest in big cities, Corruption was strongest in big cities, which had many immigrants who depended which had many immigrants who depended upon political leaders for jobs and their upon political leaders for jobs and their livelihoods--and to get them out of jail if livelihoods--and to get them out of jail if necessary. A Boston political boss told necessary. A Boston political boss told Lincoln Steffens about why the political Lincoln Steffens about why the political machine was important:machine was important:

“I think,” said Martin Lomasny, “that there’s got to be in every ward somebody that any bloke can come to–no matter what’s done–and get help. Help, you understand, none of your law and your justice, but help.”

Corruption was also widespread in Corruption was also widespread in the South, which was very poor and the South, which was very poor and had strong patterns of racial had strong patterns of racial discrimination.discrimination.

Corruption, then, was strongly linked Corruption, then, was strongly linked to unequal distributions of wealth to unequal distributions of wealth and influence and an unfair legal and influence and an unfair legal system.system.

American politics and business are far less American politics and business are far less corrupt today than in the past. The political corrupt today than in the past. The political machines in the city are largely defunct.machines in the city are largely defunct.

In the United States, almost all corruption is In the United States, almost all corruption is "grand" corruption. There is almost no "petty "grand" corruption. There is almost no "petty corruption," such as paying bribes to the corruption," such as paying bribes to the doctor, the police, the courts, or to educators.doctor, the police, the courts, or to educators.

Countries that rank high on corruption in Countries that rank high on corruption in cross-national rankings overwhelming have cross-national rankings overwhelming have high levels of high levels of bothboth grand and petty corruption. grand and petty corruption.

How Corrupt is the United States?How Corrupt is the United States?

In the 2005 rankings by Transparency In the 2005 rankings by Transparency International, the United States was the International, the United States was the 17th most honest country in the world of 17th most honest country in the world of 160 countries ranked. 160 countries ranked.

Iceland, New Zealand, Finland, Denmark, Iceland, New Zealand, Finland, Denmark, Finland, and Sweden rank highest. Finland, and Sweden rank highest. Bangladesh, Chad, Myanmar, Haiti, and Bangladesh, Chad, Myanmar, Haiti, and Turkmenistan are the most corrupt. China Turkmenistan are the most corrupt. China is ranked right in the middle, tied with is ranked right in the middle, tied with Suriname, Morocco, Senegal, and Sri Lanka.Suriname, Morocco, Senegal, and Sri Lanka.

The most corrupt countries have The most corrupt countries have both grand and petty corruption both grand and petty corruption (from the TI Global Corruption (from the TI Global Corruption Barometer Survey), as in the Barometer Survey), as in the following graph:following graph:

KEN

PAK

INS

VNZ

GEO

RUS

GUAPHL

NIC

UKRMAC

ARGBOSINDMOL

ROMCRO

POL

TURPRUMEXGHA

BRZ

BUL

LAT

CRI

GRE

CZK

SAFLITITA

SKR

MAL URU

TAIISR

EST

POR

SPN

JPN

IRE

FRA

USA WGR

CAN

LUX

UK

HOL

AST

NOR

SWZ

SNGDENFIN

ICE

0.2

.4.6

.81

See

Bot

h G

rand

an

d P

etty

Cor

rup

tion

TI G

loba

l Co

rru

ptio

n B

arom

ete

r

2 4 6 8 10TI Corruption Perceptions Index 2005

r2 = .743 N = 55

See Both Grand and Petty Corruption by TI Corruption Perceptions Index

Countries where people only see Countries where people only see grand corruption are actually pretty grand corruption are actually pretty honest:honest:

PAKKEN

INS

GEO

VNZRUS

GUAPHL

UKR

NIC

MAC

ARGBOSIND

MOL

ROM

POL

CRO

MEXPRU

GHATUR

BRZ

BUL

LAT

CRIGRE

CZK

SAF

LIT

SKR

ITAMAL

TAIURU

ISR

EST

POR

SPN

JPN

IRE

FRA

USA

WGR

CAN

LUX

HOLUK

ASTNOR

SWZ

SNG

DENFIN

ICE

0.1

.2.3

See

Onl

y G

ran

d C

orr

upt

ion

TI G

lob

al C

orru

ptio

n B

aro

me

ter

2 4 6 8 10TI Corruption Perceptions Index 2005

r2 = .424 N = 55

See Only Grand Corruption by TI Corruption Perceptions Index

How Corrupt is the United States?How Corrupt is the United States?

Where does the United States rank Where does the United States rank on grand corruption?on grand corruption?

1.1. Brazil 1.104Brazil 1.104 2.2. Bosnia 1.181Bosnia 1.181 3.3. Nicaragua 1.199Nicaragua 1.199 4.4. Turkey 1.202Turkey 1.202 5.5. Argentina 1.219Argentina 1.219 6.6. Indonesia 1.231Indonesia 1.231 7.7. Macedonia 1.277Macedonia 1.277 8.8. Lithuania 1.321Lithuania 1.321 9.9. Peru 1.321Peru 1.321 10.10. Mexico 1.342Mexico 1.342 11.11. India 1.359India 1.359 12.12. South Korea 1.376South Korea 1.376 13.13. Philippines 1.387Philippines 1.387 14.14. Poland 1.390Poland 1.390 15.15. Moldova 1.395Moldova 1.395 16.16. Uruguay 1.396Uruguay 1.396 17.17. Italy 1.404Italy 1.404 18.18. Ghana 1.410Ghana 1.410 19.19. Costa Rica 1.415Costa Rica 1.415 20.20. Ukraine 1.423Ukraine 1.423 21.21. Kenya 1.428Kenya 1.428 22.22. Bulgaria 1.428Bulgaria 1.428 23.23. Venezuela 1.438Venezuela 1.438 24.24. Romania 1.452Romania 1.452 25.25. Portugal 1.453Portugal 1.453 26.26. France 1.464France 1.464

27. 27. Georgia 1.469Georgia 1.469 28. Guatemala 1.47528. Guatemala 1.475

29. South Africa 1.50629. South Africa 1.506 30. Israel 1.51830. Israel 1.518 31. Croatia 1.52531. Croatia 1.525 32. Japan 1.53232. Japan 1.532 33. Latvia 1.53633. Latvia 1.536 34. Russia 1.56734. Russia 1.567 35. Spain 1.58835. Spain 1.588 36. Greece 1.62336. Greece 1.623 37. Pakistan 1.63937. Pakistan 1.639 38. Taiwan 1.64038. Taiwan 1.640 39. Ireland 1.68639. Ireland 1.686 40. Malaysia 1.70140. Malaysia 1.701 41. Czech 1.77241. Czech 1.772 42. West Germany 1.79242. West Germany 1.792

43. USA 1.83543. USA 1.835 44. Canada 1.90244. Canada 1.902 45. Estonia 2.10645. Estonia 2.106 46. UK 2.15446. UK 2.154 47. Switzerland 2.29347. Switzerland 2.293 48. Netherlands 2.36648. Netherlands 2.366 49. Iceland 2.41449. Iceland 2.414 50. Austria 2.50050. Austria 2.500 51. Luxembourg 2.58751. Luxembourg 2.587 52. Norway 2.84852. Norway 2.848 53. Denmark 2.92053. Denmark 2.920 54. Finland 3.09554. Finland 3.095 55. Singapore 3.10655. Singapore 3.106

Where does the United States rank Where does the United States rank on petty corruption?on petty corruption?

1. Brazil 1.132 2. Bosnia 1.286 3. Turkey 1.292 4. Argentina 1.357 5. Ghana 1.360 6. Nicaragua 1.391 7. India 1.414 8. Mexico 1.422 9. South Africa 1.435 10. Philippines 1.454 11. Peru 1.466 12. Portugal 1.484 13. Moldova 1.496 14. Lithuania 1.539 15. Georgia 1.539 16. Poland 1.549 17. Croatia 1.552 18. Macedonia 1.564 19. Costa Rica 1.567 20. Kenya 1.575 21. Bulgaria 1.603 22. Guatemala 1.607 23. Romania 1.616 24. Greece 1.617 25. Pakistan 1.628 26. Indonesia 1.641

27. Venezuela 1.648 28. Italy 1.679 29. Ukraine 1.681 30. Japan 1.715 31. Russia 1.744 32. South Korea 1.765 33. Latvia 1.775 34. Malaysia 1.813 35. Uruguay 1.824 36. France 1.844 37. Spain 1.870 38. Taiwan 1.940 39. Israel 2.020 40. Czech 2.120 41. Canada 2.164 42. Ireland 2.244 43. Estonia 2.277 44. West Germany 2.282 45. UK 2.305

46. USA 2.324 47. Luxembourg 2.492 48. Netherlands 2.515 49. Switzerland 2.574 50. Austria 2.606 51. Iceland 2.665 52. Denmark 3.132 53. Singapore 3.186 54. Norway 3.242 55. Finland 3.420

How Corrupt is American Politics?How Corrupt is American Politics? Over time, a large share of Americans believe that most Over time, a large share of Americans believe that most

politicians are crooked (from the American National Election politicians are crooked (from the American National Election Studies):Studies):

year of | Summary of are govt officials crookedyear of | Summary of are govt officials crooked study | Mean Std. Dev. Freq. Obs.study | Mean Std. Dev. Freq. Obs. ------------+------------------------------------------------------------+------------------------------------------------ 1958 | .25568862 .4364118 1670 13291958 | .25568862 .4364118 1670 1329 1964 | .30007231 .4584549 1383 13831964 | .30007231 .4584549 1383 1383 1968 | .26344505 .44067348 1283 12831968 | .26344505 .44067348 1283 1283 1970 | .33126551 .47096057 806 8061970 | .33126551 .47096057 806 806 1972 | .37695853 .48473609 2170 21701972 | .37695853 .48473609 2170 2170 1974 | .46849088 .4991715 2412 15101974 | .46849088 .4991715 2412 1510 1976 | .44131893 .49666258 2684 21051976 | .44131893 .49666258 2684 2105 1978 | .42011278 .49369279 2128 21281978 | .42011278 .49369279 2128 2128 1980 | .48476993 .49993002 1543 15431980 | .48476993 .49993002 1543 1543 1984 | .33369743 .47166191 1831 18311984 | .33369743 .47166191 1831 1831 1988 | .41794569 .49336678 1694 16941988 | .41794569 .49336678 1694 1694 1990 | .49501835 .50010632 1907 19071990 | .49501835 .50010632 1907 1907 1992 | .46619335 .49896958 2194.5916 21931992 | .46619335 .49896958 2194.5916 2193 1994 | .51620679 .49988102 1738.2501 17391994 | .51620679 .49988102 1738.2501 1739 1996 | .43358667 .49573349 1509.8852 15131996 | .43358667 .49573349 1509.8852 1513 1998 | .40271132 .49063926 1254 12541998 | .40271132 .49063926 1254 1254 2000 | .36309915 .48105104 1523 15232000 | .36309915 .48105104 1523 1523

Two of the high points come in 1974 Two of the high points come in 1974 (Watergate) and during the House Bank (Watergate) and during the House Bank scandal (1990). But in 1994, Americans scandal (1990). But in 1994, Americans were highly critical of Congress even were highly critical of Congress even without evidence of mass corruption. without evidence of mass corruption.

Currently most Americans see Currently most Americans see corruption as common among corruption as common among politicians.politicians.

In the wake of the recent scandals in Congress In the wake of the recent scandals in Congress involving lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Representatives involving lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Representatives Tom DeLay (R, TX), Bob Ney (R, OH), Randy "Duke" Tom DeLay (R, TX), Bob Ney (R, OH), Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R, CA) and allegations that Senate Cunningham (R, CA) and allegations that Senate Republican Leader Bill Frist might have had insider Republican Leader Bill Frist might have had insider information before selling stock, 55% of Americans information before selling stock, 55% of Americans now say that corruption is widespread among now say that corruption is widespread among members of Congress.members of Congress.

77% say that when lobbyists bribe members of 77% say that when lobbyists bribe members of Congress, "this kind of behavior is the way things Congress, "this kind of behavior is the way things work" and only 16% say that they are "isolated work" and only 16% say that they are "isolated incidents."incidents."

57% of Americans say that half or more of members 57% of Americans say that half or more of members of Congress accept bribes that affect their votes in of Congress accept bribes that affect their votes in one poll (CBS/NY Times); in another (Fox News), 65% one poll (CBS/NY Times); in another (Fox News), 65% say that most elected officials make policy decisions say that most elected officials make policy decisions as a direct result of money they receive from as a direct result of money they receive from campaign contributors.campaign contributors.

Only 2% of Americans believe that members of Only 2% of Americans believe that members of Congress are more honest than most people, 44% Congress are more honest than most people, 44% say more dishonest (52% say about the same).say more dishonest (52% say about the same).

67% say that it should be illegal for lobbyists to 67% say that it should be illegal for lobbyists to make campaign contributions to members of make campaign contributions to members of Congress or congressional candidates and 90% Congress or congressional candidates and 90% say that it should be illegal for lobbyists to give say that it should be illegal for lobbyists to give members of Congress gifts, trips, or other things members of Congress gifts, trips, or other things of value (meals at restaurants, for example).of value (meals at restaurants, for example).

But 55% believe that their own Representative But 55% believe that their own Representative would refuse a bribe and only 24% say that their would refuse a bribe and only 24% say that their member would accept a bribe.member would accept a bribe.

Confidence in Major InstitutionsConfidence in Major Institutions Gallup Poll. May 23-26, 2005. N=1,004 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.Gallup Poll. May 23-26, 2005. N=1,004 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3. "I am going to read you a list of institutions in American society. Please tell me how much confidence you, yourself, "I am going to read you a list of institutions in American society. Please tell me how much confidence you, yourself,

have in each one: a great deal, quite a lot, some, or very little. . . ."have in each one: a great deal, quite a lot, some, or very little. . . ."

A Great Deal A Great Deal Quite A Lot Quite A Lot Some Some Very Little Very Little None None UnsureUnsure % % % % % % % % % % %% The military The military 42 42 32 32 18 18 7 7 1 1 -- The police The police 28 28 35 35 29 29 7 7 1 1 -- The churchThe church 31 31 22 22 28 28 16 16 2 2 22 Banks Banks 22 22 27 27 39 39 11 11 1 1 -- Presidency Presidency 21 21 23 23 27 27 25 25 3 3 11 MedicineMedicine 19 19 23 23 33 33 23 23 1 1 11 Supreme Supreme Court Court 16 16 25 25 38 38 18 18 1 1 22 schools schools 16 16 21 21 39 39 22 22 1 1 11 TV news TV news 12 12 16 16 45 45 24 24 2 2 11 Newspapers Newspapers 11 11 17 17 46 46 24 24 1 1 11 Courts Courts 9 9 17 17 45 45 26 26 2 2 11 Labor Labor 12 12 12 12 47 47 23 23 2 2 44 Congress Congress 8 8 14 14 51 51 25 25 1 1 11 Big business 8 Big business 8 14 14 45 45 29 29 2 2 22 Health Health maintenance maintenance organizations organizations 7 7 10 10 43 43 35 35 2 2 33

Spending in Congressional Elections from Spending in Congressional Elections from www.opensecrets.orgwww.opensecrets.org: Hard Money Only: Hard Money Only

Spending in Congressional Elections from Spending in Congressional Elections from www.www.opensecretsopensecrets.org.org: Soft Money Only: Soft Money Only

Total Spending U.S. Presidential Elections in Millions of Total Spending U.S. Presidential Elections in Millions of DollarsDollars

YearYear

2004 2004 $717.9$717.9

2000 2000 $343.1$343.1

1996 1996 $239.9$239.9

1992 1992 $192.2$192.2

1988 1988 $210.7$210.7

1984 $103.61984 $103.6

19801980 $92.3 $92.3

1976 1976 $66.9 $66.9

What Does Money Buy?What Does Money Buy?

The Abramoff Case, or "Bribes and Tribes"The Abramoff Case, or "Bribes and Tribes" The K Street ProjectThe K Street Project Inviting lobbyists into Congressional Inviting lobbyists into Congressional

hearings but keeping Democrats out.hearings but keeping Democrats out. As Representative Barney Frank has said, As Representative Barney Frank has said,

"Members of Congress are the only people "Members of Congress are the only people to whom perfect strangers give lots of to whom perfect strangers give lots of money and expect nothing in return."money and expect nothing in return."

Does Money Usually Buy Influence or Votes?Does Money Usually Buy Influence or Votes?

There is a large body of literature on There is a large body of literature on what factors shape the voting what factors shape the voting behavior of members of Congress.behavior of members of Congress.

The major factors that shape roll call The major factors that shape roll call voting in both the House and the voting in both the House and the Senate are:Senate are:

* member's party* member's party * members' ideology* members' ideology * constituents' preferences* constituents' preferences

Across a wide range of studies, there is Across a wide range of studies, there is no support for the argument that no support for the argument that campaign contributions affect members' campaign contributions affect members' voting decisions.voting decisions.

Nor is there evidence that campaign Nor is there evidence that campaign contributions help incumbents get contributions help incumbents get reelected. Ironically, the reelected. Ironically, the moremore incumbents spend in their races, the incumbents spend in their races, the worse worse they do.they do.

Most campaign contributions to Most campaign contributions to incumbents seem to be wasted. There is incumbents seem to be wasted. There is far more money in politics than is helpful.far more money in politics than is helpful.

Why Do Interest Groups Give to Incumbents?Why Do Interest Groups Give to Incumbents?

The evidence we have suggests that interest groups The evidence we have suggests that interest groups reward incumbents who vote their way, rather than reward incumbents who vote their way, rather than give money to "bribe" members to vote with them. give money to "bribe" members to vote with them. When a member is very active in gathering support for When a member is very active in gathering support for legislation a group wants, he or she will get more legislation a group wants, he or she will get more contributions. But most members work hard on issues contributions. But most members work hard on issues because they believe in them or because their because they believe in them or because their constituents will benefit.constituents will benefit.

Incumbents use big campaign "warchests" to Incumbents use big campaign "warchests" to discourage strong opponents from challenging them.discourage strong opponents from challenging them.

Even so, the reelection rate for incumbents is about Even so, the reelection rate for incumbents is about 99% and very few challengers can raise enough money 99% and very few challengers can raise enough money to be competitive.to be competitive.

Petty corruption is almost non-Petty corruption is almost non-existent in the United States and, existent in the United States and, despite what the public thinks, grand despite what the public thinks, grand corruption seems relatively rare as corruption seems relatively rare as well.well.

The magazine The magazine CQ Weekly CQ Weekly on January on January 20, 2006 ran an article, "Two Decades 20, 2006 ran an article, "Two Decades of Lobbying Scandal and of Lobbying Scandal and Repercussion" from the 1970s to the Repercussion" from the 1970s to the 1990s. 1990s.

The article cited six major scandals: Watergate and The article cited six major scandals: Watergate and "Koreagate" (a former member of Congress and "Koreagate" (a former member of Congress and South Korean businesspeople distributed thousands South Korean businesspeople distributed thousands of dollars to lawmakers to persuade the U.S. not to of dollars to lawmakers to persuade the U.S. not to withdraw troops from in the 1970s, "Abscam" withdraw troops from in the 1970s, "Abscam" (where federal agents created a dummy company to (where federal agents created a dummy company to try to bribe members of Congress for a fictional try to bribe members of Congress for a fictional sheik) in the 1980s, the "Keating Five" scandal of sheik) in the 1980s, the "Keating Five" scandal of the 1980s where five Senators had asked the the 1980s where five Senators had asked the Federal Home Loan Bank Board to halt an Federal Home Loan Bank Board to halt an investigation into savings and loan executive investigation into savings and loan executive Charles H. Keating, Jr.; the House Bank Scandal of Charles H. Keating, Jr.; the House Bank Scandal of 1990, where over 100 members of the U.S. House 1990, where over 100 members of the U.S. House were charged with overdrafts of their accounts in were charged with overdrafts of their accounts in the House bank (most were attributable to the House bank (most were attributable to bookkeeping errors by the bank, but 77 members bookkeeping errors by the bank, but 77 members either retired or were defeated); and the House Post either retired or were defeated); and the House Post Office scandal, where Rep. Daniel Rostenkowski (D, Office scandal, where Rep. Daniel Rostenkowski (D, IL), converted postage stamps into cash.IL), converted postage stamps into cash.

Outside of the House bank scandal and assorted Outside of the House bank scandal and assorted personal scandals, fewer than 75 House members personal scandals, fewer than 75 House members have been implicated in all of these scandals have been implicated in all of these scandals combined over three decades and only a handful combined over three decades and only a handful have been convicted of wrong-doing.have been convicted of wrong-doing.

The typical Congressional response to scandal was to The typical Congressional response to scandal was to make small reforms. The biggest reforms came in make small reforms. The biggest reforms came in 1974, when all donations to political candidates over 1974, when all donations to political candidates over $25 were required to be reported to the Federal $25 were required to be reported to the Federal Elections Commission--and where very restrictive Elections Commission--and where very restrictive limits on contributions were established ($5000 per limits on contributions were established ($5000 per candidate per election cycle). However, donors have candidate per election cycle). However, donors have found ways to get around these contribution found ways to get around these contribution limitations through what has been called "soft limitations through what has been called "soft money" (funds designed to get out the vote or to help money" (funds designed to get out the vote or to help the parties).the parties).

In 1989, Congress banned honoraria In 1989, Congress banned honoraria for members of Congress, limited for members of Congress, limited outside income, and prohibited outside income, and prohibited members from keeping campaign members from keeping campaign contributions for their personal use contributions for their personal use after retirement.after retirement.

The Republicans ran in 1994 charging The Republicans ran in 1994 charging that 40 years of Democratic rule had that 40 years of Democratic rule had led to a corrupt system, but they led to a corrupt system, but they have resisted any changes in ethics have resisted any changes in ethics laws other than banning outside gifts laws other than banning outside gifts (in the House) and limiting their value (in the House) and limiting their value in the Senate.in the Senate.

Current proposals focus on banning paid trips for Current proposals focus on banning paid trips for members of Congress, except when members members of Congress, except when members travel to raise funds for their campaigns. But this travel to raise funds for their campaigns. But this would have two possibly negative effects. would have two possibly negative effects.

First, it would likely mean that all paid trips would be First, it would likely mean that all paid trips would be part of fund-raising--so that Congressional part of fund-raising--so that Congressional elections would become even more tied to fund-elections would become even more tied to fund-raising than in the past. raising than in the past.

Second, most trips involve educational visits Second, most trips involve educational visits abroad--mostly to Israel and China. These visits do abroad--mostly to Israel and China. These visits do not involve major campaign contributors.not involve major campaign contributors.

Another proposal would prohibit former members Another proposal would prohibit former members of Congress from having access to the House or of Congress from having access to the House or Senate floors or to the gyms. The impact of these Senate floors or to the gyms. The impact of these reforms is questionable.reforms is questionable.

Ethics conflicts in Congress are handled by Ethics conflicts in Congress are handled by bipartisan committees in both the House and the bipartisan committees in both the House and the Senate. Service on these committes is voluntary Senate. Service on these committes is voluntary and it is getting increasingly difficult to get members and it is getting increasingly difficult to get members to serve on these committees.to serve on these committees.

It takes a majority of the committee to recommend It takes a majority of the committee to recommend action against any member and Republicans appoint action against any member and Republicans appoint only those members whom they believe will not only those members whom they believe will not punish the leadership. In 2005, the Republican punish the leadership. In 2005, the Republican leadership stripped Rep. Joel Hefley (R, CO) of the leadership stripped Rep. Joel Hefley (R, CO) of the chair position of the House Committee after he voted chair position of the House Committee after he voted to recommend sanctions against Majority Leader to recommend sanctions against Majority Leader DeLay. Hefley has just announced his retirement.DeLay. Hefley has just announced his retirement.

Democrats want a reformed ethics committee Democrats want a reformed ethics committee system but the Republican leadership has rejected system but the Republican leadership has rejected this proposal.this proposal.

The Abramoff-DeLay scandals may be the biggest The Abramoff-DeLay scandals may be the biggest corruption cases in American politics since corruption cases in American politics since Watergate. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid Watergate. Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (D, NV) called the current Congress "the most (D, NV) called the current Congress "the most corrupt in history." corrupt in history."

There have been major scandals in the private There have been major scandals in the private sector as well, with companies such as Enron, sector as well, with companies such as Enron, TycoInternational, and WorldCom (among others) TycoInternational, and WorldCom (among others) embroiled in allegations that their leaders enriched embroiled in allegations that their leaders enriched themselves at the expense of their companies.themselves at the expense of their companies.

Congress addressed these private scandals through Congress addressed these private scandals through comprehensive legislation, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act comprehensive legislation, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, passed unanimously in the Senate and by of 2002, passed unanimously in the Senate and by 423-3 in the House of Representatives, for enhanced 423-3 in the House of Representatives, for enhanced financial disclosure by companies as well as greater financial disclosure by companies as well as greater corporate responsibility for auditing financial reports.corporate responsibility for auditing financial reports.

However, However, political scandals are political scandals are relatively rare in American politicsrelatively rare in American politics--at --at least scandals that involve more than least scandals that involve more than one individual member.one individual member.

There will always be instances of There will always be instances of scandalous behavior by individual scandalous behavior by individual politicians. Currently, four state politicians. Currently, four state governors have either resigned or governors have either resigned or have admitted complicity in scandals. have admitted complicity in scandals. But each case is distinctive and not But each case is distinctive and not part of a larger pattern.part of a larger pattern.

So Congress is not confronted with demands So Congress is not confronted with demands for widespread reform. Dealing with for widespread reform. Dealing with corruption by tinkering with institutions such corruption by tinkering with institutions such as Ethics Committees or making sure that the as Ethics Committees or making sure that the "bad guys" are punished is like crabgrass "bad guys" are punished is like crabgrass control. control.

You can pull weeds from your garden all day You can pull weeds from your garden all day and all night, but they will come back. and all night, but they will come back. Hopefully, they will not come back too soon.Hopefully, they will not come back too soon.

Banning former members from the floor or the Banning former members from the floor or the gym will have no real effect.gym will have no real effect.

In countries with low levels of corruption, it may be In countries with low levels of corruption, it may be useful to focus on institutional reforms. Dennis F. useful to focus on institutional reforms. Dennis F. Thompson, a political philosopher at Harvard, has Thompson, a political philosopher at Harvard, has suggested ethics commissions for the House and Senate suggested ethics commissions for the House and Senate composed of people who do not serve in either composed of people who do not serve in either chamber. This is a worthy proposal that deserves chamber. This is a worthy proposal that deserves consideration, especially since the Congress no longer consideration, especially since the Congress no longer seems capable of punishing members of the majority seems capable of punishing members of the majority party without political retribution.party without political retribution.

Thompson also worries that much of the corruption in Thompson also worries that much of the corruption in Congress stems from legislators' ability to provide Congress stems from legislators' ability to provide benefits to their constituents. (This is what the Abramoff benefits to their constituents. (This is what the Abramoff case is all about.) He suggests that we remove the case is all about.) He suggests that we remove the temptation of members to help their constituents by temptation of members to help their constituents by centralizing the constituency service in Congress into a centralizing the constituency service in Congress into a single office. Yet, members of Congress have developed single office. Yet, members of Congress have developed strong reputations for helping ordinary people--and strong reputations for helping ordinary people--and punishing all members because a few have given punishing all members because a few have given corrupt service may not be warranted.corrupt service may not be warranted.

In countries with higher levels of corruption, In countries with higher levels of corruption, where there is both grand and petty corruption on where there is both grand and petty corruption on a daily basis, these structural reforms and a daily basis, these structural reforms and "putting the bad guys in jail" is like crabgrass "putting the bad guys in jail" is like crabgrass control. It will punish some people for being control. It will punish some people for being corrupt, but it will not address the root causes of corrupt, but it will not address the root causes of corruption.corruption.

To address the root causes of corruption, a country To address the root causes of corruption, a country must face up to its fundamental sources: growing must face up to its fundamental sources: growing (or high) inequality, low trust among the citizens, (or high) inequality, low trust among the citizens, an unfair legal system, and strangling an unfair legal system, and strangling regulations. These problems require far deeper regulations. These problems require far deeper reforms than redesigning institutions or "putting reforms than redesigning institutions or "putting

the bad guys in jail."the bad guys in jail."