Saturday, December 13, 2008

Obama’s solution for corruption in government

The Blago story moves closer to BO with Rahm Emanuel's involvement (although I would be surprised if the Team O wasn't interested, money or not--appointment to open seats, usually through death or disgrace of the holder is hands in the cookie jar in every state that doesn't hold a special election). But Obama's ideas on how to reduce corrunption are instructive, seen at James Taranto's column.

It's just human nature, “making enough on the job” includes just about every official’s idea of his own needs, including Blagojevich, but I like Obama’s solution--more private sector jobs.
    “We know that the temptation to take a bribe is greater when you're not making enough on the job. And we also know that the more people there are on the government payroll, the more likely it is that someone will be encouraged to take a bribe. So if the government found ways to downsize the bureaucracy--to cut out the positions that aren't necessary or useful--it could use the extra money to increase the salary of other government officials.

    Of course, the best way to reduce bureaucracy and increase pay is to create more private sector jobs.”
Unfortunately, this speech was given in Kenya--I don’t think we’ll hear this theme at home. With so many jobs going to the non-profits and faith-based organizations who use government money to run their programs, the party in power doesn't have the patronage and control that a large bureaucracy does--and during the campaign, Obama promised to return that money to the government payroll. His handlers can see that this spreading the money around to the private sector through non-profits and government partnerships with business didn't bring the Bush Administration any loyalty or power base the way one would have if the government payroll had been engorged.


Anonymous said...

Murray sez:
Obama's saying that increaseing the salary of those in office could reduce the temptation of accepting a bribe has a familiar ring. It's much like back, I think, in the 70's when our legislators tried to give themselves a raise against the objections of the masses. They came up with if they didn't keep the pay range above the private sector it would reduce the quality of the people in government. That didn't fly so they just waited a few months and then passed the legislation in the middle of the night. And by golly gee, look at the quality people that move produced!
Our legislators thought it worked so well that they passed a bill that makes annual increases automatic thus avoiding the opinion of the masses.

Sarah said...

A higher wage does nothing for the amount of character and ethics a person has, now does it?