Click
above, for articles in
this issue.
Corruption Isn't the
Exception...
An American Perspective
In the
United States of America the purging of corruption ‘appears’ to come in waves,
and it has been a facet of the American Republic for quite some time. It has been a facet of living in
American society, and the battle is more ‘smoke and mirrors’ than anything else.
Bribery, and favors are part and parcel of the political machinery--so ingrained
that it is doubtful that this society will ever rid itself of ‘doing business’
any other way.
Think
of it, what is the lobbying industry if not a form of legalized bribery? While other democracies around the world
subsidize political candidates, American politicians must raise their own funds,
thus opening the way for ‘backroom shenanigans’ of favors, quid pro quos that
are in fact forms of bribery.
This
is America; bribes, and corruption are bread and butter staples of the political
system. Those are the hard facts, but let us look back, precisely one century
ago when an aggressive investigative journalist opened the shutters and
illuminated the corruption underneath the veneer of early twentieth century
America. President Theodore
Roosevelt came to respect him, he called Steffens a muckracker-- a label that
came to represent reformers in the fight for clean government.
Lincoln
Steffens was that journalist, one of the first muckrackers. Steffens published
his findings, naming names and detailing bribes, payoffs, etc., in a series of
articles, which were later published in a book, from which we cite these
passages herein published. Here is some of what he
discovered:
“The
first city I went to was St. Louis, a German-American city. It was corrupt. The next was
Minneapolis, a Scandinavian-American city, with a leadership of New
Englanders. It was corrupt. Then came Pittsburgh with Scotch Presbyterians and
they were corrupt. The next city
was Philadelphia, the purest American community of all, and the most hopeless…
The foreign element as a cause of corruption is one of the hypocritical lies
that saves us from the clear sight of ourselves…” [1]
He
goes on;
“After
‘The Shame of Minneapolis’, and ‘The Shamelessness of St. Louis,’ not only did
citizens of these cities approve, but citizens of other cities, individuals,
groups, and organizations, sent invitations, hundreds of them, “to come and
show us up, we’re worse than they are.”
“…There
are exceptions both ways. Many
politicians have gone into business and done well. (Tammany ex-mayors, and
nearly all the old bosses of Philadelphia are prominent financiers in their
cities), and businessmen have gone into politics and done well… The politician
is a businessman with a specialty.
When a businessman of some other line learns the business of politics,
he is a politician, and there is not much reform in him. Consider the United
States Senate , and believe me.” [2]
“The
bosses have us (voters) split up into parties. To him parties are nothing but means
to his corrupt ends. He ‘bolts’
his party, but we must not; the
bribe-giver changes his party, from one election to another, from one county
to another, from one city to another…” [3]
“…bribery
is no ordinary felony, but treason, that the corruption which breaks out here
and there and now and then is not an occasional offense, but a common
practice, and the effect of it is literally to change the form of our
government from one that is representative of the people to an oligarchy,
representative of special interests.” [4]
The Shame of St. Louis
One of
Lincoln Steffens exposes centered on the city of St. Louis, writing a series of
articles covering an unfolding corruption scandal that no other newspaperman
dared write about for fear of reprisals.
The men involved ran the gamut from small time hoodlums, policemen, an
ex-mayor, assemblymen (councilmen), merchants, bankers as well as other
prominent citizens. The unfolding
scandal was enormous, and the tentacles of corruption seemingly endless. Here is part of Steffens’ written
account:
“The
corruption of St. Louis came from the top. The best citizens—the merchants and
big financiers—used to rule the town… businessmen were not mere merchants and
the politicians were not mere grafters;
the two kinds of citizens got together and wielded the power of banks,
railroads, factories, the prestige of the city, and the spirit of its citizens
to gain business…”
He then quotes the Circuit [District] Attorney.
“Our investigations covering more or less a
period of ten years, shows that, with few exceptions, no ordinance has been
passed wherein valuable privileges or franchises are granted until those
interested have paid the legislators…
From
the Assembly (city council), bribery spread into other departments. Men empowered to issue peddlers’
licenses and permits to citizens… charged an amount in excess of the prices
stipulated by law, and pocketed the difference. The city’s money was loaned at
interest and the interest was converted into private bank accounts. City carriages were used by the wives
and children of city officials.
Supplies for public institutions found their way to private tables; one
itemized account of food for the poorhouse included California jellies,
imported cheeses, and French wines!
…Men ran into debt to the extent of
thousands of dollars for the sake of election to the Assembly. One night, on a streetcar going to
City Hall, a new member remarked that the nickel he handed the conductor was
his last. The next day he
deposited $5,000 in a savings bank…
The
blackest years were 1898, 1899 and 1900.
Foreign corporations came into the city to share in its despoliation
and home industries were driven out by blackmail. Franchises worth millions were granted
without one cent of cash to the city, and with provision for only the smallest
future payment; several companies which refused to pay blackmail had to leave;
citizens were robbed more and more boldly; payrolls were padded with the names
of non-existent persons; work on public improvements was neglected, while
money for them went to the boodlers… Behind the corruptionists were men of
wealth and social standing, who because of special privileges granted them,
felt bound to support and defend the looters. Independent victims of the
far-reaching conspiracy submitted in silence, through fear of injury to their
business. Men whose integrity was
never questioned, who held high positions of trust, who were church members
and teachers of Bible classes, contributed to the support of the dynasty… the
system became loose through license and plenty till it was as wild and weak as
that of [Boss] Tweed in New York.
Then
the unexpected happened—an accident.
There was no uprising of the people, but they were restive; and the
Democratic party leaders, thinking to gain some independent votes, decided to
raise the cry “reform” and put up a ticket of candidates different enough from
the usual offerings of political parties to give it color to their
platform. These leaders were not
in earnest. There was little
difference between the two parties in the city; but the rascals that were in
had been getting the greater share of the spoils and the ‘outs’ wanted more
than was given to them… Simply as part of the game, the Democrats raised the
slogan “reform” and no more [Mayor] Ziegenheinism.” [5]
The
investigation that unraveled had been the work of an enterprising and honest
Circuit [District] Attorney named Folk, who had been appointed at the behest of
many of the men of high position in the city who Folk would later come to
prosecute. Initially they had
thought that appointing an honest man as Circuit Attorney would give the perfect
cover to their schemes, after all it was they who approached Mr. Folk to be
Circuit Attorney. As Folk’s
corruption investigation came to light, the same men fearing for their own
livelihoods did their utmost to derail Folk’s further work. Steffens describes what occurs next this
way:
“
At the meeting of corruptionists three courses were decided upon. Political leaders were to work on the
Circuit Attorney by promise of future reward, or by threats. Detectives were to ferret out of the
young lawyer’s past anything that could be used against him. Witnesses would be sent out of town
and provided with money to remain away until the adjournment of the grand
jury. Mr. Folk at once felt the
pressure…
Statesmen,
lawyers, merchants, clubmen, churchmen—in fact men prominent in all walks of
life visited him at his office and at his home, and urged that he cease such
activity against his fellow townspeople.
Political preferment was promised if he would yield; a political grave
if he persisted. Threatening
letters came, warning him of plots to murder, to disfigure and to blackguard
[blacklist him]…
With
[Folk’s] first successes… he soon had them [the targets of his investigation]
suspicious of one another, exchanging charges of betrayal and ready to
‘squeal’ or run…" [6]
"When
another grand jury was sworn and proceeded to take testimony there were scores
of men who threw up their hands and crying ‘Mea Culpa’ begged to be permitted
to tell all they knew and not be prosecuted. The inquiry broadened.
The
son of a former mayor was indicted for misconduct in office while serving as
his father’s private secretary, and the grand jury recommended that the
ex-mayor be sued in civil courts, to recover interests on public money which
he had placed in his own pocket.
A true bill fell on a former City Register, and more Assemblymen were
arrested, charged with making illegal contracts with the city. At last the ax struck upon the trunk
of the greatest oak of the forest.
Colonel Butler, the boss who had controlled elections in St. Louis for
many years, the millionaire who had risen from bellows boy in a blacksmith’s
shop to be the maker and guide of the Governors of Missouri…"
[7]
"In
all cities, the better classes—the businessmen—are the sources of corruption;
but they are so rarely pursued and caught that we do not fully realize whence
the trouble comes. Thus most
cities blame the politicians and the ignorant and vicious poor.
Mr.
Folk has shown that St. Louis, that its bankers, brokers, corporation
officers,--its businessmen are the sources of evil, so that from the start it
will know the municipal problem in its true light…But for the rest of us, it
does not matter about St. Louis any more than it matters about Colonel Butler
et al [and others]. The point is,
that what went on in St. Louis is going on in most of our cities, towns and
villages. The problem of
municipal government in America has not been solved. The people may be tired of it, but
they cannot give up… " [8]
Lincoln
Steffens wrote these words in 1902, and yet more than 100 years later the
problem persists. In fact, absent
the names of the individuals involved in the scandal of the St. Louis
investigation conducted by the Circuit Attorney, a reader today could easily
recognize the pattern and insert names of current or ex-politicos. The scams are
the same; the theft of city services, city moneys, no show jobs, bribes, quid
pro quos, backroom deals, inflated city contracts benefiting insiders,
sweetheart deals to adopt laws traded for jobs for family members of
politicians, in industry or corporate America—the scams are the same only the
faces and names change, and at heart is an ongoing network of corruption and an
organized criminal enterprise, that saps the resources of American cities,
drives up the costs of city services while bankrupting those same towns, cities
and states.
Victor Saraiva,
Editor
Our next newsletter issue will pursue this question of
the prevalence of corruption in American politics, by looking at both national
and local examples of questionable governance, and the long shadow of
impropriety.
NOTES:
1. Steffens, Lincoln., The Shame of the Cities, NY, McClure,
Phillips & Co., 1904, Introduction.
2. ibid, p.4
3. ibid, p.5
4. ibid, p.17
5. ibid, p.25
6. ibid, p.34
7. ibid, p. 39
8. ibid p. 41
Posted December 31 2006
URL:
www.thecitizenfsr.org
SM
2000-2011
You are here: HOME page-NEWSLETTER-DECEMBER 2006-Corruption
Previous : Open Letter
|