Why Can’t the Governor Sell Obama’s Seat?

Published in ifeng/The Beijing News
(China) on 12 December 2008
by Bai Shuo (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Alan Kwok. Edited by Louis Standish.
In order to stop government officials from corruption, some countries have set up tight watchdog groups. In Europe for example, officials are scared of the media’s eye simply because it is a corruption killer. In addition, to publicize the income of officials also opens a door for various monitoring groups to be able to trace the source.

Rod Blagojevich, the governor of the state of Illinois, has lately been accused for selling one of his state’s Senate seats. It is now widely known to the world as a case of “pay for play.” This scandal tells people that even in the U.S., well-known for its democracy and legal system, it is still not able to eliminate the lust of senior officials like Blagojevich as well as to prevent bribery. Meanwhile, it also tells the world how this country prevents government officials form corruption and how such matters are addressed. Blagojevich offered $500,000 USD for the job, but was exposed before the deal was made. He was then arrested when the FBI’s phone recording evidence was presented.

In the U.S. and U.K., investigation institutes such as the FBI and the U.K. Police Service all have the right to listen in on government officials if they are suspected of corruption. Media sends people out to test the politicians. If any government official is suspected of abusing power for personal gain or has indicated the possibility to sell power, that particular official’s work will no longer be credited once exposed, regardless if it lacks substantial evidence. The official can hardly stay in the position and the next thing to do then will be to resign.

Some countries have introduced tight monitoring systems such as the Office of Public Integrity of the Department of Justice in the U.S. and a specific police office in the U.K. They will lie out a thorough investigation soon when they receive a report or have had some leads. In 2006, the U.S. Department of Justice searched Congressman William Jefferson of Louisiana and found $90,000 USD wrapped in aluminum foil and kept in his freezer. The revelation caused a firestorm and Jefferson was consequently charged with 16 counts by the Grand Jury, one of which was bribing foreign government officials.

Monitors from opposition parties are another useful force. In order to protect their own interests, soon when opposition parties find any stakes that can be used to attack their competitors, they will bring those to the public. Back in 1997, when Tony Blair first became the Prime Minister of the U.K., the Conservative Party revealed that the Labor Party gained political donations from the “Formula One” racing companies and the condition was to postpone the policy of not allowing cigarette advertisements on racing cars. The Labor Party gave back the donations and the policy was immediately put into effect.

Government officials from the U.S. and Europe are also scared of their media, as they are good terminators of corruption. Any careless speech or action will make officials become the media’s eyesore and will easily lead them to a career fiasco. For example, this is the fourth time for the current Business Secretary Peter Mandelson to work for the government. He was forced by the media to leave the last few times. When he worked for the Blair administration the first time, he was exposed by reporters that before his appointment in 1997, he had a real estate mortgage where he doesn’t need to pay interest. He resigned immediately. Later he returned, but not for long. Diligent reporters found out that he called the immigration officer of his jurisdiction for some rich people’s permanent residence. He didn’t recall but resigned two days later.

Such a multi-layered watchdog network pushes officials to be extremely careful. In addition, to publicize officials’ incomes is another way for these monitoring forces to trace any potential misbehavior. For example, you didn’t pay for a speech you gave or your purchasing capability exceeds the amount of your income, these will all trigger an investigation, no matter if it is done by law enforcement or the media. This is also why corruption is seldom heard in the U.S. and the U.K. political circles. Because once a corruption is brought to light, it will certainly be all over the place. Like Blagojevich, when he succumbed to corruption, the public attacked him. We foresee his resignation very soon.

(Bai Shuo works for media in Guangdong Province)



作者:白烁

一些国家为防止官员贪腐,建立了严密的监督体系。而欧美国家的官员最怕的还有媒体监督,因为媒体是肃贪的“杀手”。并且,官员收入公布制度,也容易让各方监督力量找到怀疑的线索。

美国伊利诺伊州长布拉戈耶维奇涉嫌出售参议员席位的消息,正作为“卖官”案例在全世界传播。这个丑闻除了让人们看到民主法治的美国仍不能消除高官贪欲、权力寻租现象外,也让人深究西方究竟是怎样预防官员贪污、治理腐败的,因为布拉戈耶维奇虽然开出了50万美元的价格,但在未成交之前就被揭露了。布拉戈耶维奇被捕,是以美国联邦调查局的电话录音为证据的。

在英美,像美国联邦调查局、英国警务总署等调查机构,是可以对涉嫌贪污的政府官员进行电话监听的,媒体记者也可装扮成交易一方来进行捕风捉影式的“试探”。如果官员有以权谋私的倾向,或者表达出权力寻租的可能性,一旦公布于众,即便没有实际交易而难定罪,官员的品德也不再被信任,很难有效地展开工作,辞职是接下来的动作。

一些国家为防止官员贪腐,建立了严密的监督体系。就监督体系而言,独立的司法机构如美国司法部有廉政司、英国警务总署等,在接到举报或自己掌握某种线索后,便进行深入的调查。2006年美国司法部就对路易斯安那州众议员杰弗逊进行调查,在家中找到了他涉嫌贪赃的90万美元,这些钱分别用锡箔纸包着藏在冷冻冰柜中。这件事引起轩然大波,最终被联邦大陪审团以16项罪名提起公诉,其中一项罪名涉及向外国政府官员行贿。

在野党的监督是另一支重要的力量。为了维护本党利益,能够抓到对手的把柄,则会立即公布。早在1997年,布莱尔刚坐上英国首相宝座,保守党便揭露工党接受了“一级方程式”赛车公司的政治捐款,交换条件是暂缓实施不准在赛车上打香烟广告的政策。工党立即吐出了钱,禁止在赛车上打香烟广告的政策马上实施。

欧美国家的官员最怕的还有媒体监督,因为媒体是肃贪的“杀手”。官员言行稍有不慎,马上会成为新闻记者的“眼中钉”,稍有闪失就可能身败名裂。英国商务部长曼德尔逊,现在进入内阁是“四进宫”,他几次都是被媒体逐出政府。在布莱尔政府第一次入阁不久,有记者翻出他曾在1997年上台前无息借钱买房,他马上辞职走人。后来他再回内阁后,又是“好事”的记者发现他曾给自己所管辖的移民局官员打了电话,要给某富人办永久居民。他记不清楚了,但两天就辞职。

这样多重的监督网,迫使政府官员不敢轻举妄动。而官员收入公布制度,也容易让各方监督力量找到怀疑的线索。比如某次演讲未纳税,你的购买力超出了收入量,都可能成为一场调查,无论是司法调查还是新闻调查的起始点。也因此,欧美政坛上贪官比绯闻者要少得多。而一旦有贪腐之虞,则必定成大新闻到处传播。就像布拉戈耶维奇,他一旦起了卖官的“贼心”,就必受舆论谴责。可以预见,他很快就会宣布辞职。

□白烁(广东 媒体从业者)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Mexico: From Star Wars to Golden Domes

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Hong Kong: From Harvard to West Point — The Underlying Logic of Trump’s Regulation of University Education

Topics

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Germany: Friedrich Merz’s Visit to Trump Succeeded because It Didn’t Fail

Related Articles

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China