When I first came to you, asking what you thought about the corruption in our government, I was taken aback by your refusal to enter such a conversation. Truthfully, I was expecting — at best — that you’d immediately agree corruption is (at least) a serious problem and that you’d take the lead to explain where it was and what we could do about it. Instead, you refused to acknowledge that corruption itself is a serious issue, and you maintained the attitude that our government is working as it should be working, more or less, and that I’m being too vague. You interpreted me as saying simply, “the whole system is corrupt,” as a way to vent my own frustrations and to over extend certain specific instances of criminality, blundering, or simply ill advised behavior, including perhaps specific minor areas of true corruption. I felt from you push back. I learned quickly that you’d rather fight me and not enter into my concern, and the genuine concern of most of your constituency. (I make that last statement out of my own experience, and I invite you: go incognito and ask people if they think Congress is corrupt.) For you, I’d have to do a lot of research and make specific charges – nail you to the wall – before you would volunteer your expertise on specific issues. Basically I’d have to do your job for you.
The last I checked, your website still does not list corruption in government as an “issue,” and so I conclude that you continue to ignore it. Part of your job is to understand what’s wrong with government; unfortunately, you don’t seem to want to attack its most serious shortcomings.
In your last letter to me, however, you did say that you “established a track record of supporting strong ethics reform to root out corruption.” It’s nice to see that you think there’s at least some meaning to the word, “corruption.” However, you use the word in restricted capacity; I believe the “ethics” reform you refer to does not address the most serious issues corrupt governmental function supports, including, but not limited to:
The corrupt Military/Industrial/Governmental complex that profits from waging and spreading illegal wars of aggression, resulting in the deaths of many innocent people, an increase of the number of people who hate us, loss of critical treasure, and the establishment of “endless war” as government policy; the escape from justice by banker/financial super rich and powerful people who collude with government in finding ways to deflect oversight and prosecution for their enormous crimes against society; the corrupt system of Congressional lobbying;
The evolving door between corporate officers and governmental officials, both elected and appointed (as in the President’s cabinet); the corrupting influence of the growing Police State, with increasing surveillance and restrictions on citizens and increasing privatization of the military and prisons, with continued weaponization of local police, and the absurd, “war on drugs;” the disregard for the impending disasters of Global Warming, because of corrupting influence of fossil fuel energy companies; the horribly corrupt system of private funding of public elections, whereby corporations and powerful individuals receive favors from government, etc.
Really, you don’t acknowledge the mechanisms of corruption that enable such despicable behavior?
In your last letter, you did discuss the devastating effects of the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court; you revealed that there are several proposed constitutional amendments circulating Congress, and that you would work towards enactment of a firm and decisive response to Citizens United. On this note, I wholeheartedly agree with you that such an amendment would be a good idea and could theoretically combat corruption in a broad way.
However, judging by previous mandates for reform conducted by Congress, I’m not too optimistic. Is one of these proposals that all private funding of governmental elections be completely outlawed? Perhaps you agree, the most effective single action against government corruption is to require that such elections be funded only through a well thought out system of public funding? Once again, time will tell whether Congress does the right thing or fails us miserably, as it has done so often in the last decade or so. Thus, how effective will this remedy to Citizens United be? As effective as Dodd-Frank?
I do have a suggestion. Since you haven’t been willing to give your constituency your thoughts on where our government is most corrupt, with possible remedies, would you consider enlisting the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress to evaluate the role of corruption in our Federal government? Provide a suitable definition, evaluate how extensively corruption affects Government’s operations and effectiveness, and include a Part 2, which would make remedial suggestions.
While you’re at it, make an honest effort to have the CRS make this report, and all reports by this taxpayer funded organization, available to the public online; it’s a disgrace that CRS doesn’t already do that, which is behavior that facilitates corruption. I think most would agree that such a study as I suggest would be beneficial to the Nation. But of course, such a study could also serve to give the false impression Congress is serious about fixing itself, then thrown on the hidden scrap heap, since the people who are supposed to fix things don’t even acknowledge there’s a problem.
Thomas Tonon
Bolfmar Avenue, Princeton Junction
