Would you trust this man?
My NPR segment was live, and predictably shorter than the star of the day, disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who was there, also predictably, to talk about ethics. Isn’t it interesting that when businessmen, lawyers, investment gurus and politicians get caught and go to jail, they always manage to have very profitable epiphanies that make them ethics experts just in time to give them a book or speaking tour deal, since their original lines of work are no longer an option?
Do I believe these changes of heart and values are real? Not for a second.
Few confirm my skepticism, however, more obviously than Black Jack did in his segment with Michelle. All of his solutions to the corruption on Capit0l Hill involved new laws, not ethics. As Abramoff well knows, if an individual is smart, ambitious and unethical, tougher laws are just a challenge, not a roadblock. I bet Jack has already figured out ways to make a buck by manipulating the very reforms he proposed.
Not all of them are wrong-headed, but even those that aren’t should be unnecessary. Using inside information about legislation to make a killing in the market should be a guaranteed ticket to private life, because voters shouldn’t tolerate it. Nancy Pelosi’s response to the expose (by the well-known right wing attack show, “60 Minutes”) of her husband’s investment successes based on tips derived from Nancy’s corporate suitors was telling: she blamed it on partisan critics, knowing that her constituency cares more about winning the ideology wars than about having representatives who are committed to transparency, honesty and fairness. As long as that is the prevailing attitude of Americans, Abramoff’s reform inspirations are no more than second career cash cows for one of the unethical Washington power players who got caught.
There are plenty more where he came from, and as long as the American public keeps sending them back to Washington, nothing will change.
Ethics Alarms 
Even exposure doesn’t seem to change anything. The crooks just carry on business as usual or,as in Jack’s case,find other ways to get our money. When are people going to wake up?
That phrase is scrawled in ancient Greek on the Parthenon, I bet. Our best bet to get as many to wake up as possible, and hope its close to enough.
Usually, when people suggest a law to fix something that is already against the law, it is because enforcement is lacking. Last time I checked, fraud was illegal. The problem is, we don’t arrest and charge people with it. I am pretty sure tens of thousands of people could have been charged, arrested, and convicted of fraud in the recent investment meltdown. They then could have been banned from any occupation involving banking and investments. If RICO were used, all their assets could have been seized. I don’t understand why we need new laws to address this when we already have such powerful instruments to use in such instances. Oh, that’s right, because no one would apply those laws because they decided that the people involved were too important to be accountable to the law, because our politicians have been taking bri… I mean contributions from the very same people, and because the regulators who are supposed to oversee those responsible are their friends and former coworkers.
You can have any laws you want, but when the people in charge of applying them are corrupt, it is no use. The only likely outcome is innocent people will get caught in the new, trendy, poorly thought-out laws and justice will suffer even more. For an example, look at the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Loved your point about how “loyalty” is a dangerous value. I think that is so key, in this case and many others.
I hope you got in a chorus of “Legal Vice.”
That’s good…I didn’t have time, though.
It’s been an interesting week at Ethics Alarms. We’ve had three Jacks: the good (Marshall), the bad (Abramoff) and the evil (the Ripper).
I would respond, but again, don’t have the time or inclination to write things twice because your blog just deletes comments at its whim.
Oh, it does not.
Yes, that was an LOL moment for me, when I finally found an NPR station playing the show you were on, tuning in a little late to hear you–or so I thought–and being puzzled why “Jack” was discussing financial issues with the host rather than Penn State.
When she made the transition to the next segment and announced that she’d been talking to Jack Abramoff, I just laughed thinking “What the HELL is HE doing there?!?”
–Dwayne