PDA

View Full Version : How corrupt is the US Government?



joespam
06-24-2005, 07:32 AM
I'm not talking about the current Administration as much as I'm talking about how Congress and a lot of Federal offices work.

I look at decisions made by the EPA, FCC, and FDA and see blatant conflict of interest present in appointees who make decisions in favor of large corporations and then end up working for them, if they weren't already ex-employees to begin with. I hear stories of lobbyists writing legislation sponsored without review by the Congressman whose campaign they funded. I won't even mention Haliburton, Iraq, and Dick Cheyney.

Is only because of media and other watchdog groups tendency to emphasize the negative that I have the impression that government is fundamentally corrupt? What do you think? Is there more good than bad in government?

artimoff
06-24-2005, 07:41 AM
Power corrupts. period.

What about Jim McGreavie who hired his boyfriend for some position he wasn't qualified for? It's not just the federal government.

GabeLogan
06-24-2005, 07:45 AM
I'm not talking about the current Administration as much as I'm talking about how Congress and a lot of Federal offices work.

I look at decisions made by the EPA, FCC, and FDA and see blatant conflict of interest present in appointees who make decisions in favor of large corporations and then end up working for them, if they weren't already ex-employees to begin with. I hear stories of lobbyists writing legislation sponsored without review by the Congressman whose campaign they funded. I won't even mention Haliburton, Iraq, and Dick Cheyney.

Is only because of media and other watchdog groups tendency to emphasize the negative that I have the impression that government is fundamentally corrupt? What do you think? Is there more good than bad in government?

It's every man for themselves and whomever has the largest checkbook wins. Not saying all politicians are bad but I would say the longer you are in the easier it is for them to get to you. If voters held politicians more to their voting record instead of party affiliation the system would be better. I'm a Democrat but stupid is stupid no matter the party affiliation.

Fourthman
06-24-2005, 07:46 AM
It's no more corrupt than it has been for much of my lifetime. They just don't give a fuck now.

Bill?
06-24-2005, 07:57 AM
little bit, little bit. I mean, clearly there's corruption on all levels, but it's not Bangladesh or anything.

Brian Defferding
06-24-2005, 08:12 AM
This is one big reason why I'm a registered member of the Libertarian Party.

Government acts without regard and responsibility. An example is public land; the government owns around 630 million acre of land' and a good portion of that is leased out to companies for dumping, cutting down trees, and complete removal of the land's resources because the government has no incentive to resell the land (therefore little care is taken for it).

The damage of government goes beyond what you hear in the news. Often times the damage is done in such a subtle way that one normally would ever know. Take the dairy industry. The price for milk is calculated through a long formula of guidelines that must be followed according to law thanks to the 1996 Federal Agricultural Improvement Reform (FAIR) Act, and some legal action passed during the depression era. Did you know it's illegal to sell Wisconsin milk in some parts of the United States? Why is the government hassling over milk? Because of this, California's megafarms are uprising and the old natural way of raising cows on a farm in Wisconsin have slowly become a thing of the past.

Remember the whole deregulation fiasco in California that everybody was up in arms about? That whole term "Deregulation" is a false term - retail price for energy was still capped, but not the wholesale price; and from a supply-and-demand spike the wholesale prices shot up; also there were other regulations attached to the deregulation act passed in 1996 which prevented the energy companies from changing contracts with other utility companies to help fluctuate with the market. More information about that can be found here. (http://www.catoinstitute.com/pubs/pas/pa406.pdf)

Of course, this is all tip of the iceberg. I haven't gone into the damage of drug laws, taxes, and unnecessary government programs and services.

I think now is the time to vote for Libertarian candidates than ever before. Just my thoughts.

RebootedCorpse
06-24-2005, 08:13 AM
More corrupt than the UN, less corupt than Democratic Republic of Congo.

Ashton
06-24-2005, 08:24 AM
Is there more good than bad in government?

Yes, I think so. I don't believe that there is a lot of corruption inside the actual Federal agencies themselves. Now people at the top and elected officials may be a different story. Almost everything that a Federal agency does is based on rules and regulations which stem from laws passed by congress. and government agencies are well monitored- from within and without. I'm not saying corruption doesn't exist, but its limited within the ABC agencies IMO.

Jastermereel
06-24-2005, 09:02 AM
Is there more good than bad in government?

Yes, I think so. I don't believe that there is a lot of corruption inside the actual Federal agencies themselves. Now people at the top and elected officials may be a different story. Almost everything that a Federal agency does is based on rules and regulations which stem from laws passed by congress. and government agencies are well monitored- from within and without. I'm not saying corruption doesn't exist, but its limited within the ABC agencies IMO.
There may be more good than bad (though I'd say that theres also a great deal of apathy and ignorance cooked in there), but the bad is disproportionatly present in places of actual power. Its sort of like dying of a brain tumor the size of a grapefruit and saying, "Its OK. Overall my body has more healty parts than sick parts in it."

Shane W
06-24-2005, 09:15 AM
More corrupt than the UN, less corupt than Democratic Republic of Congo.

That's a bold statement.

RebootedCorpse
06-24-2005, 09:18 AM
That's a bold statement.
I know, but if those bribe-taking bastards in the Congo don't like it, fuck them!

Ashton
06-24-2005, 09:19 AM
There may be more good than bad (though I'd say that theres also a great deal of apathy and ignorance cooked in there), but the bad is disproportionatly present in places of actual power. Its sort of like dying of a brain tumor the size of a grapefruit and saying, "Its OK. Overall my body has more healty parts than sick parts in it."

I think it's possible for there to be problems at the top because that's where the big decisions are made. But the bulk of a government agency itself does nothing but act on procedures, policies and plans- and then accounts for what its done in great detail. It would be difficult for corruption to exist on a wide scale inside Federal agencies just because of the detailed monitoring that takes place and the inflexible nature of government itself. the executive branch of government, I mean.
That and there are safeguards within government such as security offices within the government agencies whose sole purpose is to monitor the employees themselves.

Shane W
06-24-2005, 09:22 AM
I know, but if those bribe-taking bastards in the Congo don't like it, fuck them!

YEAH!!!:rock:

The Roman Candle
06-24-2005, 09:26 AM
I will say this: people who think congress and other positions are elected solely by votes are kidding themselves. All elected representatives end up in or out of office based on their marketing budget and competence of their PR team. It's like the criminal justice system. It's all about who has the better lawyer.
When was the last time we had a president who wasn't at LEAST a millionare? If people voted for candidates based on issues and ability, we'd have a hell of a lot more independents and third party candidates in office.

Boris the Blade
06-24-2005, 09:27 AM
*pours some butter on popcorn and waits for the fun to start*

Ashton
06-24-2005, 09:30 AM
you know I don't even believe that there is that much corruption in the upper levels of government agencies either- people that high up aren't going to do anything to risk their positons, not when they can be replaced so easily. but I'm only defending the executive branch- politicians are a different story for sure.

The Roman Candle
06-24-2005, 09:30 AM
*pours some butter on popcorn and waits for the fun to start*

http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?p=397703#post397703 (http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?p=397703#post397703)

Just for you.

Jastermereel
06-24-2005, 09:32 AM
you know I don't even believe that there is that much corruption in the upper levels of government agencies either- people that high up aren't going to do anything to risk their positons, not when they can be replaced so easily. but I'm only defending the executive branch- politicians are a different story for sure.
Both history and I disagree with you.

They're only risking their position if they get caught. Once you have a system in place it becomes increasingly unlikely that that happens.

Nixon was sloppy.

Boris the Blade
06-24-2005, 09:33 AM
http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?p=397703#post397703 (http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showthread.php?p=397703#post397703)

Just for you.
*dumps popcorn on TRC's head*

RebootedCorpse
06-24-2005, 09:34 AM
When was the last time we had a president who wasn't at LEAST a millionare?
Bill Clinton. At least when he was first elected. I think he made like $30 K as Gov of Ark.

Brian Defferding
06-24-2005, 09:42 AM
I will say this: people who think congress and other positions are elected solely by votes are kidding themselves. All elected representatives end up in or out of office based on their marketing budget and competence of their PR team. It's like the criminal justice system. It's all about who has the better lawyer.
When was the last time we had a president who wasn't at LEAST a millionare? If people voted for candidates based on issues and ability, we'd have a hell of a lot more independents and third party candidates in office.

Private funding to a candidate's campaigns and their parties for which they represent was never a problem to me, I consider it a necessarily evil. It's the hypocrisy of the government's "Campaing Finance" limits and laws which I have a big problem with. The reason why is because the two-party systems are funded by our taxes, with state-funded primary elections and money to pay for their national conventions coming from our IRS forms every tax year ("Would you like to make a tax-deductible $5 donation to the "President Elect Fund?""). These things need to stop, especially since the two main parties have enough money to fund their own primary elections and national conventions.

Also, many local election systems require an enormous amounts of paperwork, filings and signatures in order to be on a ballot. I think many places need to lower these requirements so that independents don't have to spend all sorts of money to meet them. That will help lesser funded candidates to get noticed.

Ashton
06-24-2005, 09:45 AM
Both history and I disagree with you.

They're only risking their position if they get caught. Once you have a system in place it becomes increasingly unlikely that that happens.

Nixon was sloppy.

But I'm more referring to department heads, not presidents in this case.

Angel of Distraction
06-24-2005, 09:45 AM
How blue is the sky?

People with power will usually use it for themselves. Our only hope is that there really is a Hell, so the people who spent their lives stepping on others for personal benefit can be ass-raped repeatedly while turning on a spit for all eternity.

Unfortunately that's a rather remote chance.

Jastermereel
06-24-2005, 10:37 AM
But I'm more referring to department heads, not presidents in this case.
Then read the first two lines again without the third line's nixon example. Any clearer?

Ray G.
06-24-2005, 10:39 AM
It's less corrupt than it was during the time of Harding, Hayes, Kennedy, Nixon, or Bush Sr. I know that doesn't mean much, but a little corruption is nothing new.

joespam
06-24-2005, 10:44 AM
It's less corrupt than it was during the time of Harding, Hayes, Kennedy, Nixon, or Bush Sr. I know that doesn't mean much, but a little corruption is nothing new.

What do you base that on? Just curious - I don't know enough about those adminstrations to have a comparative opinion.

Ray G.
06-24-2005, 10:52 AM
What do you base that on? Just curious - I don't know enough about those adminstrations to have a comparative opinion.


Harding: Teapot dome scandal

Hayes: Stole the election outright. Literally, Tilden won by two million votes, and then Hayes created his own results out of thin air. The Congress, controlled by the Republicans, voted along party lines to certify Hayes' results

Kennedy: Why shouldn't dead pets vote?

Nixon: Durrrr.....

Bush Sr. : Actually, most of the bad things he did was when he was de facto president under Reagan, like Iran-Contra.

TyPierce
06-24-2005, 11:02 AM
More corrupt than the UN, less corupt than Democratic Republic of Congo.

I don't know about that last part... :scared:

Jastermereel
06-24-2005, 11:13 AM
Harding: Teapot dome scandal

Hayes: Stole the election outright. Literally, Tilden won by two million votes, and then Hayes created his own results out of thin air. The Congress, controlled by the Republicans, voted along party lines to certify Hayes' results

Kennedy: Why shouldn't dead pets vote?

Nixon: Durrrr.....

Bush Sr. : Actually, most of the bad things he did was when he was de facto president under Reagan, like Iran-Contra.
So lets see. Corporate favoratism with no-bid contracts, illegal election practices, internal coverups, and illegal and disasterous foreign policy?

Damn. Glad we're rid of those bad old days. Today we're free and clear. Imagine how bad things would be if we'd revisited the last century of coruption in half a decade like some bad greatest hits album.

joespam
06-24-2005, 11:40 AM
Harding: Teapot dome scandal
Hayes: Stole the election outright. Literally, Tilden won by two million votes, and then Hayes created his own results out of thin air. The Congress, controlled by the Republicans, voted along party lines to certify Hayes' results

Kennedy: Why shouldn't dead pets vote?


Fascinating stuff. Can't find anything about Kennedy registering his pets, but the 1960 election is compelling reading anyway.

DigiEmissary
06-24-2005, 07:04 PM
The United States government is a garden that hasn't been pruned in over 200 years.

The Human Target
06-24-2005, 09:03 PM
I thinks that its partly corrupt, and mostly its just become an ass backwards boys club that convinced itself it had to suck and play by a certain set of rules that get nothing done and compromise everything.

Captain Nate
06-25-2005, 04:17 AM
Government has exceeded its proper role. I have said this many times over. That has led to abuse. Who is most to blame? The liberals, but the conservatives share their guilt for too often buying into their premises on the merits of big government.