That answer, it turns out, has as many nuances as corruption itself. Interviews with law enforcement officials, prosecutors and, perhaps the best authority on the subject — those arrested in previous sweeps, like Mr. Botti — reveal a culture of corruption so ingrained that it has become impossible to resist when the envelope appears.How many other states would that describe?
A decade-long building boom has flooded towns with millions of development dollars, as well as wealthy businessmen eager to secure sewer permits and zoning waivers. The Democratic Party firmly dominates local politics, turning most elections into sleepy coronations. The state’s news organizations, once vigorous watchdogs, have been decimated by a deep industry downturn.
Add to all that the fact that New Jersey is divided into hundreds of tiny fiefdoms, where part-time elected officials without much education and with small salaries wield considerable power, and the heady mix of arrogance, control and promised payoffs dissolves the will of even the most determined reformer.
It also seems to dissolve their intelligence and caution, because often enough, the man with the envelope is wearing a wire.
All in all, it doesn't make Jon Corzine's reelection battle any easier. He was already running behind. But now with the story of mostly Democrats, some of them associated with Corzine, being rounded up in a flashy corruption story while Corzine runs against a Republican with a reputation of battling corruption, the path to reelection is now seeming nearly insurmountable.
8 comments:
I've come to the conclusion that in spite of the idiotic regard of the legislature of California for its yearly budget at least we don't seem to have the same level of corruption as some other states. That doesn't mean there is none but what there is at the state level seems more to do with milking their perks for every dime the pols can get.
We just don't have the really smart and visionary crooks in government just the half-educated political junkies that rise in politics due to term limits and the death or disgrace of the pol on the ladder above them.
Pat Patterson: "we don't seem to have the same level of corruption as some other states" Hope eternal.
The operative word is "seem". How much do "we" know what happens behind the door? When there is a large sum of money floating around, there is corruption.
Believe me, it's better to keep your money in your own pocket than to trust it with the politicians. Do you care how a stranger spends his money? Don't you praise your wares so a customer will buy? The only reason you cares about the customer's money is to get his into your pocket. The politicians are doing exactly that: to get your money into their pockets, then they will take care of it. They will continue to spend your money to travel to "fact finding trips" in exotic places. They will use their own money to finance their campaigns, then charge their campaigns 10% interest to pay themselves back. The "contributors" will contribute to the campaign fund that pays the politician 10% interests on his own money financing his own campaign. The politician will earmark your money to finance his contributors' projects. Convoluted? If the politican spends 10 million of his own money, 10% is one million per year for as long as the loan is outstanding. Will the poltician ever retire the loan? Will the sun rise in the West tomorrow?
"We just don't have the really smart and visionary crooks in government..." or, more likely: We just don't have the reasonably smart voters to notice the shenanigans perpetrated by the crooks in govt. Smart crooks don't get caught. Those who get caught must have stepped on some smart crooks' toes, or are sacrificed to protect smarter crooks.
Have you ever wondered how so many politicians become multi-millionaires? Where do their money come from? Follow the money, then you will find a crook who may not even be really smart or visionary.
Pat Patterson,
This:
"...half-educated political junkies that rise in politics due to term limits...."
Does not explain a surplus or shortage of corruption by itself anymore than it explains competence or incompetence on the behalf of the elected. Your voters are the reason for what ails California. Now how did they get that way?
You know that I'm an advocate for TERM LIMITS but I can also appreciate that citizens of a given state should determine the terms governing their elected officials at the state level. If voters can grant access to the halls of power in California to "half-educated political junkies" (you were probably being charitable there), why give the junkies tenure through incumbency?
I live in Maryland and will soon sadly be a resident of the state in the fullest sense in that I will be subjected to its income taxes in exchange for meager representation, therefore I can't afford to throw stones (3.8% tax on rocks and 4.7% tax on skipping stones found near water). California puzzles me where Maryland has made itself utterly inconsequential.
I think as far as term limits in California we are definetly between Scylla and Charybdis. Listing to far in either direction tends to produce a disaster. But I have a suspicion that longer terms of incumbency make it more likely that the incumbent likes what he is doing and generally doesn't simply begin planning for his next office before he has arranged the desks in his new office.
I've also never been a real fan of blaming the electorate whenever some politician proves himself not to be either as productive or squeaky clean as when he first appeared. I still expect them to represent their constituents to the best of their abilities.
We in California did recently pass a proposition that is *supposed to* reform the representative districting process. To me, this is preferrable to term limits.
I don't know the details of when this is supposed to happen in CA, but my hope is that it will help somewhat in making for more competitive elections and therefore more effective representation.
What do you think, PP? Will that help?
I'm also hoping that one day we'll have some reform of how federal congressional districts are mapped. IMO, the current maps - and the processes for deciding them - are a disgrace.
Yes, the way it is now some districts are so overwhelming Democrat or Republican that some districts are changed to affect the outcome by moving voting blocs around.
In my area Jane Harman's district lost a big chunk of Republican voters by transferring Palos Verdes into Maxine Water's congressional district. It just meant that Harman was saved and Water's won by 80% instead of her usual 90%. This holds especially true for state wide offices.
Pat Patterson,
"I have a suspicion that longer terms of incumbency make it more likely that the incumbent likes what he is doing...."
I certainly agree with that analysis when it comes to Charles Rangel.
"I've also never been a real fan of blaming the electorate whenever some politician proves himself not to be either as productive or squeaky clean as when he first appeared".
We have Marion Berry out here but as bad as he has been, only the voters are to blame.
"I still expect them to represent their constituents to the best of their abilities".
Both Rangel and Berry have done that but the rest of us might find a problem with HOW they've represented their constituents.
But, not argumentatively, how much attention do we place on politicians that do behave honorably their entire careers but we concentrate instead on those with their hands in the till or somewhere else they shouldn't be. Or worse we have policy disagreements with them and confuse voting them out of office with term limits. Let's be honest there are politicians nationally and in states without term limits that are reelected because they have enough votes, even if we judge them to be loony, to be safely kept in office for years.
I expect politicians, and most do, behave honorably and try to represent the interests of those that elected them. However I realize that the opposite is just as likely which is why they seem to have great power but are often thwarted by the minority party or one of the other two branches.
Post a Comment