Blagojevich Ethical Violations Essay Example

organization. Additionally, after the fact, he should have forthcoming and told the truth regarding his participation involving any misconduct or misjudgment, dealing with others who might have consulted him or gave him inaccurate information regarding his political career.

Instead, he was unapologetic regarding any wrongdoing with respect to his lack of ethical judgment and criminally behavior with respect to the outrageous things he had allegedly done or said. He should have been forthcoming about his breach of trust and admitted to a higher standard of personal conduct and personal ethics which is be expected in his role as Governor of Illinois or in role of an elected official. Unfortunately, he should have put the interests of Illinois above his own personal interests.

Rod Blagojevich or any public official should have at had the integrity to resign when his actions caused embarrassment or dishonor to the office to which he was elected and to the people who have entrusted him with the office and their best interests. By virtue of the actions and sometimes non-actions, a publicly elected official is or should not be entitled to remain in office during the time of such insurmountable evidence and circumstances to try to vindicate himself at the expense of the public and the state.

It requires a tremendous amount of time and expense to the state and ultimately to the public to impeach or such individuals. In other words it leaves the public and state left to pay the bill for his fight, including not only the direct costs but also the shame and economic harm which it brings on the entire state of Illinois,

then we should be rewarded by his very long tenure in jail. Given the insurmountable evidence, the ethical thing to do would have been to resign forgoing leaving the state with a large debt and irrevocable harm due to his unethical behavior. Blagojevich was guilty of corruption and violation of the public rust and consequently, was impeached and sent to prison for his misdeeds. In essence, he lied by evading the truth and not honestly addressing the question of whether the allegations against him were true. He had offered little or nothing in respect to the allegations to substantiate the assertion of his innocence other than the allegations being made against him were false. His attitude, instead, was a sense of entitlement to which he believed he had a right to act in the manner in which he did based upon his power and position as governor that put him above the law.

Unfortunately, he offered no suitable apology or alibis to explain his actions or for his lapse in judgment. Criminal Malfeasance or Abuse of Power Another breach of his ethical obligation was malfeasance or his misuse of power in public office, for his own selfish and personal gain. Malfeasance is another term for misuse of power or the abuse of political power. In other words, malfeasance is the in intentionally doing something either legally or morally wrong which one had no right to do.

It always involves dishonesty, illegality, or knowingly exceeding authority for improper reasons. This distinction can apply to corporate officers, public officials, trustees, and others cloaked with responsibility (Legal Dictionary, 2012). According to of the U. S. OGE

as stated in Subpart G – Misuse of Position Subpart G, it is prohibited from using his public office for personal or private gain for family, friends, or persons with whom they are affiliated in a non-Government capacity, or for the endorsement or any product, service, or enterprise (OGE, 2013).

Additionally, pursuant to Illinois Government Ethics Act (2009), the Executive Inspector General (EIG) has jurisdiction over the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and all officers and employees of, and vendors and others doing business with, executive branch State agencies under the jurisdiction of the Executive Ethics. By virtue of jurisdiction, the EIG is responsible for and is required to investigate all allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, mismanagement, misconduct, nonfeasance, misfeasance, malfeasance, or violations of this Act or violations of other related laws and rules (2009).

Thus, it was the duty of EIG to investigate any allegations of malfeasance or abuse of power by Governor Blagojevich. We know the abuse of political power takes a multitude of varied and awful forms. According to OGE and the federal indictment, Blagojevich abused his political power to obtain favors or privileges for himself, family and friends and consequently. It was the responsibility of the EIG to investigate Blagojevich alleged abuse of power where he allegedly, among other things, abused his power or authority to release $8 million in state funds to Children Memorial Hospital in hopes of getting a significant campaign contribution.

He additionally gave lucrative government contracts with companies or individuals who also made campaign contributions. Another example of his abuse of power or misuse of his political office was his failed attempt to influence or

peddle (as he had power to appoint a replacement) or trying to sell President Obama's, very attractive, senate seat in exchange for cash and/or for personal favors.

As mentioned in his federal indictment extortion, bribery, greed, prejudice, betrayal are all elements of misfeasance. All which translate to an abuse of political power and the lack of underlying moral degeneracy (Justice, 2009). The ethical course of action to take in this instance would have been not to take advantage, as Governor of Illinois or use his position, political power and discretion to manipulate or control individuals or a particular situation over.

Bullying is wrong and Blagojevich used bullying type techniques to assert his will upon those in subordinate or lower level positions. Because you are elected by, the people it did not entitle him assert his authority that was not in line with his duties as Governor of Illinois. Blagojevich should have taken heed to the fact that as a public official he was in the position to serve the public and not the other way around.

Instead, as Governor of Illinois, his attitude, from his actions, was a sense of entitlement (as a king to his subjects) that placed him above the law and no one in the United States is above the law Extortion Another criminal or unethical conduct or act of Blagojevich was extortion. Pursuant to OGE, Title V Administrative Personnel,-Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, gifts from outside sources, prohibits employees from soliciting or accepting gifts from prohibited sources or gifts given because of their official position.

The term “prohibited source” includes anyone seeking

business with or official action by an employee’s agency and anyone substantially affected by the performance of the employee’s duties (OGE, 2013). Additionally, Illinois Government Ethics Act and State Officials and Employees Ethics Act, a legislator may not accept any economic compensation under any circumstance where he knows or should know that there is a possibility that the opportunity is being given to him with intent to influence his conduct or performance in line with his official duties.

Nor shall a legislator charge or accept a price, fee, compensation or other consideration for the sale or lease of any property or the furnishing of services which is in excess of what would be charged in the ordinary course of business. Also pursuant to the act, no legislator may use or attempt to improperly use their authority or influence in dealing with a state agency in any form of representation where the legislator would participate and has or maintains a close personal or economic relationship within a state agency (2009).

In addition, IGEA prohibits a close economic association with a Legislator. It prohibits any legislative interest being discussed that would infer an economic opportunity with a legislator with the intent to influence that legislator’s official conduct, or to create good as to accept or reap financial benefit when he knows, or should know, of a substantial possibility that it is being offered with intent to influence that legislator’s official conduct (2009).

Additionally, pursuant to the Act, no person with whom a legislator maintains a close economic association should accept a representation case where there is substantial reason for him to believe that it

is being offered with intent to obtain improper influence over a State agency (IGEA, 2009).