1

Memorandum

To: TBD From: Jetmir Troshani Date: Date goes here

Re: The Case of NY State Senator Joseph Bruno on Ethical Violation

Outline

Statement of the relevant Facts

Ethics perspective

Accountability perspective

Prevention

Economics, consequences outcome

i. Statement of the relevant Facts

Over the past few years, ethical reform is a phenomenon that has received a lot

of attention across the country, most especially in the state of New York where from

Joseph L. Bruno was once a majority leader. Joseph L. Bruno was an upstate

Republican and a majority leader of the state of New York between 1994 to June 2008

when he resigned (Gershman, 2011). In his tenure as the senator of the state he

participated in all state business as is settled in private by the leaders and governor of

the two legislature houses.

ii. Ethics perspective

Individuals who are charged with the responsibility to serve the public trust such

as the political leaders ought to be cautious to ensure that in all their endeavors they

make responsible as well as ethical decisions. The realities of deadlines demand for

quick results, bureaucracies, and budget makes it difficult or unclear how to formally

deal with ethics (Cooper, 2012). The responsible administrator premise is that

2

administrators of public trust fulfilling their administrative duties. In so doing they are

often encounter ambiguous and often complex ethical issues which may compel them to

deal with numerous compelling issues these issues may include: their own personal

beliefs and values, the different facts of each state of affairs, as well as institutional

norms coupled with external obligations. Administrators therefore set down

administrative responsibility as well as build up for themselves an operational ethic

through the practice of get to the bottom of the aforementioned issues both in concrete

and specific state of affairs. A time goes by the adopted working ethic develop into the

gist of an individual professional moral fiber (Hakim, 2008).

iii. Accountability perspective

During the period he was a senator Mr. Bruno had powers that allowed him to

direct billions of dollars both in the private and public investment to the capital

constituency. While exploring his business dealings, the federal investigation lead him

to resign and he was indicted in July 2008 on eight counts of federal felony (McIntire,

2007). In the year that followed that is 2009 he was found guilty of the two counts and

sentenced to serve two years. After the indictment the federal prosecution accused the

former senator of receiving more than 3 million dollars as handouts and bribes over the

past 13 years from a number of companies seeking state grants and contracts.

During the trial evidence was adduced to prove that Mr. Bruno had committed

fraud by way of receiving kickbacks as well as bribes amounting to about 240, 000

dollars from a certain business man who sought his assistance in the legislature.

According to the indictment issued against Mr. Bruno, apart from getting cash payments

camouflaged as consulting fees, Mr. Bruno as well had a hidden interest in a computer

3

software firm and a racehorse partnership having contracts with state agencies

(Hamblett, 2011).

Often Mr. Bruno described inaccurately his fraudulent dealings on his annual

financial disclosures. Sometimes he completely omitted those dealings. Wright

investment service was his major source of income. Between 1994 and 2006, this firm

paid him not less than 1.37 million dollars for purposes of influencing the labor unions in

New York to take into service this company as an adviser on matters related to the

unions benefit funds investments (Lyons, 2011). Wright investment service employees

as well as union officials were led to falsely believe by Mr. Bruno that his transactions

had been vetted by the ethics officials of the state, while in fact no such disclosure had

ever been made. According to the United State Northern District Mr. Bruno exploited his

office as the state senator by his act of hiding the sources and the nature of sizable

amounts of payments he received from persons who in return benefited from his

purported bureaucrat dealings (McIntire & Jeremy, 2009).

iv. Prevention

The imposition of a fine and prison sentence by the court to Mr. Bruno is a

landmark step in punishing and prevention of future unethical dealings of public trust

administrators. Such judgments make the administrators accountable for their actions,

and reflect the gravity of failure to uphold the ethics of public trust administrators as well

as promote respect for the law and prevent other persons from engaging in corruption in

future (Confessore, 2009).

v. Economics, consequences outcome

4

Following the unethical dealings undertaken by Mr. Bruno over the last 15 years

or so, he earned more than 3.2 million dollars through fees that he collected from his

clients. All this money was obviously earned illegitimately and also used to ran Mr.

Bruno’s’ multimillion dollar businesses camouflaged as consulting firms more or less

exclusively out of his office as a government official (Confessore, 2009). According to

Glaberson (2011), between 1994 and 2006, this firm paid him not less than 1.37 million

dollars for purposes of influencing the labor unions in New York to take into service this

company as an adviser on matters related to the unions benefit funds investments. Mr.

Bruno further receiving more than 3 million dollars as handouts and bribes over the

period he was a senator from a number of companies seeking state grants and

contracts. All of which money was concealed from public accounting.

5

References

Confessore, N. (2009). For Bruno, How Albany Works Is Also on Trial. New York Times,

pp.17.

Confessore, N. (2010). Bruno Gets 2-Year Prison Term, but Stays Free. New York

Times, pp.9.

Cooper, T. (2012). The Responsible Administrator: An Approach to Ethics for the

Administrative Role. NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Gershman, J. (2011). Ex-Official Surfaces as Ethics Gadfly. The Wall Street

Journal, pp. 25.

Glaberson, W. (2011 November 16). Appeals Court Allows New Trial for Bruno. The

New York Times, pp. 1.

Hakim, D. (2008). A Furor After Bruno’s Role Is Revealed. New York Times, pp.8

Hamblett, M. (2011 November 17). Bruno Faces Retrial After Panel Vacates Corruption

Convictions. The New York Law Journal, pp.12.

Lyons, B. (2011). Mumbo Jumbo Over, Focus Finally on Corruption Again. The Albany

Times Union, pp 12.

McIntire, M. (2007). Bruno’s Business Touch Wasn’t Always Golden. New York Times,

pp3.

McIntire, M & Jeremy, W. (2009). Ex-Senate Leader Bruno Is Indicted for Corruption.

New York Times, pp.1