PDA

View Full Version : Corruption - did your state make the list?



David G
08-10-2014, 11:02 AM
Oregon did not... but the home state of a certain prominent Bilge figure DID. So... if an elected official starts sending you PM's demanding cash in exchange for certain 'unnamed' considerations... don't blame him. He came by it naturally <G>

https://homes.yahoo.com/news/the-most-corrupt-states-in-america-033250358.html

CWSmith
08-10-2014, 12:09 PM
Surprised by some, not others. We missed the top 10, thankfully.

Funny how the author can always find a reason - some are too poor, others have too much money, ...

bobbys
08-10-2014, 12:12 PM
Im thinking about moving back to jersey where the politicians are as pure as the wind driven snow compared to this corrupt state.


Cover Oregon director still getting paid $14K a month after “resignation”
POSTED AT 3:21 PM ON MAY 22, 2014 BY ED MORRISSEY


Share on Facebook 3K 3K SHARES
The lack of ObamaCare accountability extends farther than just the boundaries of the Beltway. In fact, as The Oregonian discovers, it goes from sea to shining sea. The reviled director of Cover Oregon, whose failed web portal has prompted a federal investigation into potential fraud, supposedly resigned his post and got kicked out of his government sinecure. It turns out that he’s just on an extended vacation (via Drudge Report):


Bruce Goldberg, the respected, long-time director of the Oregon Health Authority, offered to resign on March 18. Two days later, with the Cover Oregon tech mess going from bad to worse, Gov. John Kitzhaber announced that he’d shown Goldberg the door.


The resignation was “effective immediately,” said officials in the governor’s office.


Or so we thought.


It turns out, Goldberg never really left and is now drawing a full-time salary from the state. Oregon officials confirm Goldberg returned to full-time status at the Oregon Health Authority on May 15 and will use his accrued vacation pay until July 18.


He’s getting paid $14,425 a month.
Let’s not forget that Oregon taxpayers are footing that bill to pay for exactly zero enrollments through their $250 million web portal. Governor John Kitzhaber laid all of the blame for the failure at Goldberg’s feet over the past few weeks, no doubt hoping to escape culpability himself. Oregon taxpayers already on the hook for hundreds of millions of wasted dollars might have assumed at that point that at least they weren’t paying for Goldberg’s incompetent leadership any longer, and for very good reason.


What happened? Cover Oregon and Oregon Health Authority played a shell game with Goldberg. His resignation didn’t stop his paycheck at the latter until April 10, when Goldberg officially got paid $3600 a month to be a “consultant” to Cover Oregon. Why Cover Oregon needed to have the man Kitzhaber blamed for its utter failure on hand as a consultant is another question Oregon taxpayers should be asking themselves, but that arrangement only lasted five weeks. That’s when OHA brought Goldberg back on at full salary — and full health and pension benefits, which provides knife-twist irony to this story.


Last week, federal investigators issued subpoenas to Cover Oregon, OHA, and its officials in the criminal probe:


The federal criminal investigation of Oregon’s health insurance exchange took a step into public view Tuesday when the U.S. Attorney’s office issued broad subpoenas seeking information from Cover Oregon and the Oregon Health Authority.


While the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s interest in the exchange debacle had beenpreviously reported, the legal demands dated May 13 indicate things may have moved beyond a preliminary inquiry to a full-blown investigation.


The investigation, led by federal prosecutors and the FBI, is seeking documents, memos, and emails between the two state entities that oversaw the botched health exchange with U.S. authorities in charge of dispensing federal money for the project.
At least they’ll know where to find Goldberg. Maybe Kitzhaber can take a page from the Barack Obama playbook and put Goldberg in charge of the state’s investigation into Goldberg’s alleged failures.

BrianW
08-10-2014, 12:22 PM
Alaska made it!

Although I think most of the oil field tomfoolery is several years to a decade old now.

I didn't follow any link (if provided?) to see the logic/evidence used to create their list.

bobbys
08-10-2014, 12:32 PM
Alaska made it!

Although I think most of the oil field tomfoolery is several years to a decade old now.

I didn't follow any link (if provided?) to see the logic/evidence used to create their list.
.

Sarah Palin is all you need to know on how it made the list.

David G
08-10-2014, 12:54 PM
bbbbbbys - Alaska made the list long before Palin rose to prove the Peter Principle. She didn't help.

And as perverse as some of the state and local politics around here are (have you followed the travails of Clackamas County in the last few years???)... Oregon still didn't make the top 10. What does that tell you about the ones who did?

Waddie
08-10-2014, 01:08 PM
I wouldn't put much store by this list. Figuring out how much corruption a state may be suffering from is just too difficult and most of it never sees the light of day. So all they can go by is what's publicly known, and that would punish a state that does a better job of uncovering their corruption. In fact, by doing a better job of investigating and making public that corruption, the state may even have less corruption than other states who look clean in the public eye. Like always, stats can be deceiving.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-10-2014, 01:12 PM
I wouldn't put much store by this list. Figuring out how much corruption a state may be suffering from is just too difficult and most of it never sees the light of day. So all they can go by is what's publicly known, and that would punish a state that does a better job of uncovering their corruption. In fact, by doing a better job of investigating and making public that corruption, the state may even have less corruption than other states who look clean in the public eye. Like always, stats can be deceiving.

regards,
Waddie

And apologists can be convincing at times.

Waddie
08-10-2014, 01:23 PM
And apologists can be convincing at times.

And some people accept what they read with an uncritical eye. "They wouldn't print it if it weren't true".

BTW; my state didn't make the list.

regards,
Waddie

David W Pratt
08-10-2014, 02:11 PM
They must be really bad to exclude RI

David G
08-10-2014, 02:23 PM
They must be really bad to exclude RI

And Maryland? My thought exactly. Of course there could be something in their methodology that minimizes the transgressions of those two states. But, as the critics above fail to grasp... this is nothing more than ONE snapshot, taken thru a particular lens. Interesting, nonetheless.

bamamick
08-10-2014, 04:10 PM
If ever there was an unimpressive list, this was one of them. I doubt one whole heck of a lot of research went into it. That being said, I do not doubt that Alabama has it's fair share. Over the period of a decade every single one of Mobile's city councilmen either resigned in shame or went to prison. The manager of the civic center went to prison. I know of a county commissioner who went to prison, and one who was said to have been so corrupt that no one would dare send him to prison. But all of that was 30 years ago. Over the last ten years I can not think of anything remotely resembling corruption having been brought to trial, or even to the public's attention.

Mickey Lake

Waddie
08-10-2014, 08:35 PM
And Maryland? My thought exactly. Of course there could be something in their methodology that minimizes the transgressions of those two states. But, as the critics above fail to grasp... this is nothing more than ONE snapshot, taken thru a particular lens. Interesting, nonetheless.

Funny, the article doesn't qualify it as such. They must've used Plutarch's Brownie box camera for that snapshot. Quit trying so hard to defend it as serious research; that article is fluff. Now, there's nothing wrong with fluff; so long as it's recognized as fluff. This article would have been better presented as tongue in cheek, or even as satire.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-10-2014, 09:49 PM
If ever there was an unimpressive list, this was one of them. I doubt one whole heck of a lot of research went into it. That being said, I do not doubt that Alabama has it's fair share. Over the period of a decade every single one of Mobile's city councilmen either resigned in shame or went to prison. The manager of the civic center went to prison. I know of a county commissioner who went to prison, and one who was said to have been so corrupt that no one would dare send him to prison. But all of that was 30 years ago. Over the last ten years I can not think of anything remotely resembling corruption having been brought to trial, or even to the public's attention.

Mickey Lake


Funny, the article doesn't qualify it as such. They must've used Plutarch's Brownie box camera for that snapshot. Quit trying so hard to defend it as serious research; that article is fluff. Now, there's nothing wrong with fluff; so long as it's recognized as fluff. This article would have been better presented as tongue in cheek, or even as satire.

regards,
Waddie


There is corruption in America; the question is where.A recent report provides an answer. An academic at the University of Hong Kong and another at Indiana University set out to rank the states by level of corruption, combing arrest and conviction records for public officials. (Click here or on the image above to see them. (http://yhoo.it/1mrqDGO))

Cheol Liu and John L. Mikesell also reported that states with greater public spending have more corruption -- particularly when the spending is in areas ripe for bribery, like construction, police and highway projects.
"People think corruption doesn't happen here," said Chicago lawyer Sergio Acosta, who used to work in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Illinois. He's a member of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's Ethics Reforms Task Force, which aims to codify appropriate behavior for city employees. "That's the real value of this report."

So... do y'all have something against academics from Indiana? Hong Kong? If you disagree with the findings, or harbor suspicions about the rigor of their methodology... I'm sure their published paper is available for your perusal. The article does, however, give the basis for their judgement: arrest and conviction records for public officials. I'd agree, though, that it does seems as if it might be a quicky. Perhaps some of you are familiar enough with academia to recognize that this is the sort of thing academics do, and publish... hoping to garner enough interest to inspire the funding of a larger, more in-depth study on the topic. I did... and took it for what it was worth.

Sometimes I wonder if folks bother to read the OP before deciding to comment.

Waddie
08-10-2014, 10:18 PM
David G; inspire the funding of a larger, more in-depth study..........I did... and took it for what it was worth.

Good to see we agree that it's merely a troll for funding. But that's not a very inspired defense; I'm sure you could do better. Or maybe you should just wait for the "in-depth" version to come out and start a thread on it. It may actually have merit. I'll stay open minded.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-10-2014, 10:33 PM
Good to see we agree that it's merely a troll for funding. But that's not a very inspired defense; I'm sure you could do better. Or maybe you should just wait for the "in-depth" version to come out and start a thread on it. It may actually have merit. I'll stay open minded.

regards,
Waddie

Nice backpedal. But you called this paper 'fluff' which should have been labeled as 'satire'. It isn't. It's a serious bit of academic work. Not as elaborate and critical a study as Masters & Johnson, perhaps, but - as far as I can see - perfectly serious and legitimate. Your fail.

Waddie
08-11-2014, 12:09 AM
Nice backpedal. But you called this paper 'fluff' which should have been labeled as 'satire'. It isn't. It's a serious bit of academic work. Not as elaborate and critical a study as Masters & Johnson, perhaps, but - as far as I can see - perfectly serious and legitimate. Your fail.

Keep trying, you'll find a believable defense yet........ But this isn't it. David, poor David, give it up. You posted an article that is without much academic merit, and now you desperately feel the need to defend it. Don't take it personal, you didn't write it. Besides, any third grader could punch holes in it. It isn't worth defending. So come on, just say, yeah, it's interesting in a tabloid sort of way, but it isn't science.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-11-2014, 12:17 AM
Keep trying, you'll find a believable defense yet........ But this isn't it. David, poor David, give it up. You posted an article that is without much academic merit, and now you desperately feel the need to defend it. Don't take it personal, you didn't write it. Besides, any third grader could punch holes in it. It isn't worth defending. So come on, just say, yeah, it's interesting in a tabloid sort of way, but it isn't science.

regards,
Waddie

Ahhh... but see... it IS science. Social science of an academic sort. To say that not much research went into it, or it's just fluff, is dismissing it too cavalierly. I wonder if those who do so have even done such a research project. You'd think if they had... they'd show the efforts of these two professors a bit more respect. The fact that you dismissing their work as 'without much academic merit' makes it your fail as well.

Waddie
08-11-2014, 12:22 AM
David G; Ahhh... but see... it IS science

Tabloid science... try again.....

regards,
Waddie

Phillip Allen
08-11-2014, 12:23 AM
one of you is gonna have to sit with the other in his lap until you guys learn to get along :)

Waddie
08-11-2014, 12:25 AM
one of you is gonna have to sit with the other in his lap until you guys learn to get along :)

Don't hold your breath, Phillip... :)

regards,
Waddie

Phillip Allen
08-11-2014, 12:26 AM
:) .

Vince Brennan
08-11-2014, 06:04 AM
(ding)

Round Two

Curtism
08-11-2014, 06:12 AM
And some people accept what they read with an uncritical eye. "They wouldn't print it if it weren't true".

BTW; my state didn't make the list.

regards,
Waddie

I have it on good authority (someone close to me who worked inside the 'machine' up there) that it's not for lack of trying.

Jim Mahan
08-11-2014, 07:15 AM
I don't think California made the list, but that's probably just because they paid someone to change the list.

David G
08-11-2014, 10:37 AM
I don't think California made the list, but that's probably just because they paid someone to change the list.

:D:rolleyes::D

KMacDonald
08-11-2014, 05:43 PM
No, but it should have. The fraud in the highway admin is beyond belief.

Osborne Russell
08-11-2014, 05:46 PM
The impression grows that there's a huge amount of local govt corruption -- school districts, water districts, etc. Good old street level graft.

See, e.g., Bell, California.

David G
08-11-2014, 06:33 PM
Such corruption is merely a symptom of the larger issue:

"When there is an accumulation of money and power into fewer and fewer hands, people with the mentality of gangsters come to the fore. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- Lord Acton

Waddie
08-11-2014, 10:31 PM
Such corruption is merely a symptom of the larger issue:

"When there is an accumulation of money and power into fewer and fewer hands, people with the mentality of gangsters come to the fore. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- Lord Acton

I tried to find that exact quote on the web, but all that came up was the WBF. The web quotes Acton differently;


John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/absolute-power-corrupts-absolutely.html

Could you please site where you got your version from? The language seems too contemporary but I am not accusing you of being so deceitful as to falsify a quote. I know you're not that low. Just please provide a citation.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-11-2014, 11:18 PM
Sorry - no citation. All I remember is that I found it in a collection of Acton's articles in the University of Texas - Austin library. I dug out my old Economic History notebooks and found where I jotted it down, along with several other of his bon mots. But I did not take note of the book or article they came from.

Acton did tend to repeat the same themes in slightly different terms. For example - I have the one you reference (which includes the great men = bad men construction) written thusly --


Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupt absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.

And I have two versions of the quote you're asking about. Here's the other --


And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that.


And here's a couple more I liked --


Liberty consists in the division of power. Absolutism in concentration of power

Official truth is not actual truth

Men cannot be made good by the state - but they can be made bad. Morality depends on liberty

And, of course, he said - many times in many places, with slight variations --


Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely

Waddie
08-11-2014, 11:35 PM
Sorry, David, I don't believe he ever said it the way you quoted him in post #30. The language is just too contemporary. No one wrote using those exact phrases back then. Maybe you subconsciously remember it that way because it fits better with your own personal politics, but that doesn't make it accurate. So I'll refrain from accusing you of willfully manipulating a quote, and I'll gladly apologise if you do find a citation that proves you correct.

BTW; it would be appropriate considering that the original quote has been challenged to provide citations for the other versions in post #32 as well, though one or two do look to be quoted correctly.

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-11-2014, 11:49 PM
Waddie,

Since all those quote came from the same book, at the same time... and exist now only as scribbles in an old notebook... and since I don't have record of the publication... I'm afraid you'll just have to believe what you wish. Unless the editor of that collection went to a lot of work to fabricate a bunch of quotes to stick into various articles... it's hard to imagine them being "incorrect". So I'll stand by my notes. You're welcome, of course, to engage in some scholarship of your own. Maybe you'll discover that there are one or more quotes that have been attributed to Acton and which have, over the years, come into question... and that some of these are among them. If you find something like that... feel free to let me know.

Another of his I've always liked --



"There are two things which cannot be attacked in front: ignorance and narrow-mindedness. They can only be shaken by the simple development of the contrary qualities. They will not bear discussion. (http://www.searchquotes.com/quotation/There_are_two_things_which_cannot_be_attacked_in_f ront%3A_ignorance_and_narrow-mindedness._They_can_on/40275/)"




Sorry... I can't offer any provenance on that one either...

Waddie
08-11-2014, 11:51 PM
David, I did a little research. Your quote does exist, but it doesn't go with the power corrupts quote. It is a different quote altogether, but Acton did say it. However, not quite the way you quote. But I won't quibble over specifics, and it's close enough, though not technically correct, that I do apologise. Looks like we were both a little wrong.

Your quote; "When there is an accumulation of money and power into fewer and fewer hands, people with the mentality of gangsters come to the fore. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" -- Lord Acton

And remember, where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control. History has proven that. (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/l/lordacton409907.html)


http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/lord_acton.html

PS. Your concern with financial inequality may have led you to incorrectly add in that first part... :)

regards,
Waddie

David G
08-12-2014, 10:15 AM
Waddie,

You're too gracious. I'm glad that you've settled in your own mind that Acton said such things. Of course, as I don't see any source cited for those quotes at BrainyQuote... maybe it's fake. It would ease Donn's mind, and Pless' mind as well, I'm sure, if you could provide us with a citation...

I did a bit of googling just now - and here's a source for Acton info... if anyone would like to know more about him and his work. http://www.acton.org/ It even has some quotes, including a few of the ones I have. http://www.acton.org/research/lord-acton-quote-archive But... again, no reference to the original source for each.

As I mentioned... one thing I learned from reading a collection of Acton's articles was that he had some themes, which he repeated - in slightly altered language, and in various combinations - in various documents. So... while it's conceivable that the book I copied from had the quote wrong, and it's certainly possible that I jotted it down incorrectly, or transposed it badly to these pages... I don't regard any of that as likely. Therefore, I'll continue to regard the quote as genuine... unless someone can show otherwise.

BUT... back to the main point of the OP. Corruption. Venal 'public servants' have always been with us in small proportion. Just as there are dishonest folks in any walk or station of life. What I would contend - and what is illustrated by the Acton quote as a pattern of human behavior - is that the sort of wealth concentration we are currently experiencing leads to an increase in the proportion of corruption. Another reason that we're overdue for a reversal of the policies that have taken us into these dysfunctional waters.

bobbys
08-12-2014, 10:44 AM
And to think David wants to educatuate me?

David G
08-12-2014, 10:48 AM
And to think David wants to educatuate me?

Well... somebody needs to, and anything would help. Maybe you should start small - with some Socratic dialogue with the Sage of Arkansas... P.A.??

bobbys
08-12-2014, 10:52 AM
Well... somebody needs to, and anything would help. Maybe you should start small - with some Socratic dialogue with the Sage of Arkansas... P.A.??
.

You are not going to be my SHANG unless you pick up the pace.:d

David G
08-12-2014, 10:55 AM
.

You are not going to be my SHANG unless you pick up the pace.:d

You're not ready for the brilliance of SHANG. You kaint even figger out what the topic at hand is --

"BUT... back to the main point of the OP. Corruption. Venal 'public servants' have always been with us in small proportion. Just as there are dishonest folks in any walk or station of life. What I would contend - and what is illustrated by the Acton quote as a pattern of human behavior - is that the sort of wealth concentration we are currently experiencing leads to an increase in the proportion of corruption. Another reason that we're overdue for a reversal of the policies that have taken us into these dysfunctional waters."

You'll have to settle for a lesser light...

bobbys
08-12-2014, 11:00 AM
hey you changed that,,!.

This thread is corrupted!

David G
08-12-2014, 11:07 AM
hey you changed that,,!.

This thread is corrupted!

Do you have originalical source material to support these accusations??? No? Figgered! Now hush and let the adults talk. You and I will just listen. We might learn something...

Osborne Russell
08-12-2014, 11:43 AM
BUT... back to the main point of the OP. Corruption. Venal 'public servants' have always been with us in small proportion. Just as there are dishonest folks in any walk or station of life. What I would contend - and what is illustrated by the Acton quote as a pattern of human behavior - is that the sort of wealth concentration we are currently experiencing leads to an increase in the proportion of corruption. Another reason that we're overdue for a reversal of the policies that have taken us into these dysfunctional waters."[/COLOR]


Not quite right, I would say. Corruption is only partly dishonesty. Dishonesty is a character trait that the individual brings to the situation. Power corrupts an honest person, is the point. And there's more power in politics than outside of it. But all power corrupts, and concentrated wealth is power -- while it lasts.

The image I have is of a French aristocrat with chest full of hoarded gold, spending it all to get himself smuggled out of the country. He would say, good thing I hoarded the gold or the mob would have gotten me. He does not say, hoarding the gold generated the mob.

Waddie
08-12-2014, 02:06 PM
David G; BUT... back to the main point of the OP. Corruption. Venal 'public servants' have always been with us in small proportion. Just as there are dishonest folks in any walk or station of life. What I would contend - and what is illustrated by the Acton quote as a pattern of human behavior - is that the sort of wealth concentration we are currently experiencing leads to an increase in the proportion of corruption. Another reason that we're overdue for a reversal of the policies that have taken us into these dysfunctional waters.

I agree that when the distribution of wealth goes out of proportion it becomes a problem, though I doubt you and I would agree on the remedy. However, mangling and therefore misrepresenting a quote, no matter how well intentioned, does your position a disservice, if you want to be taken seriously. Put the shoe on the other foot; if the quote of a well known liberal were to be misquoted, how would you react? Likely, you would severely chastise the poster of that inaccuracy, and rightfully so.

BTW; I'm not convinced that inordinate wealth leads to more actual corruption, per se, but it does give the wealthy a disproportionate influence in our democratic political system, be it George Soros or the Koch brothers.

regards,
Waddie

John of Phoenix
08-12-2014, 02:51 PM
I can't believe that Louisiana came in second.

Those people have graft down to a science. Ex-Governor Edwin Edwards, inmate #03128-095, convicted on 17 of 26 corruption charges, used to brag that he was better at it than Huey Long because, unlike Long, he never got shot.

SECOND? That study is a farce.

cs
08-12-2014, 03:06 PM
Even though they say my state is one of the most corrupt I did find this in direct reference to this study.


None of this means a place like Tennessee should be abjectly deemed “Too Corrupt to Fail” — or not yet, anyhow. The state is, after all, the home of Chattanooga. That city developed a publicly owned fiber optic system that delivers some of the world’s fastest Internet speeds — and does so at relatively affordable rates for businesses and consumers. As a result, Fortune calls Chattanooga “a center for innovation” and Wired says it may be the next Silicon Valley.Any state with that potential in its midst can have a bright economic future, and the encouraging news is that Tennessee’s dirty politics didn’t stop Chattanooga’s efforts. But an exception to a rule is not a rule unto itself. In general, corruption’s deleterious effect on public policy is a serious problem — and not just a purely political problem either. It is a destructive force that can make or break an entire local economy.

Chad

johnw
08-12-2014, 03:18 PM
I can't believe that Louisiana came in second.

Those people have graft down to a science. Ex-Governor Edwin Edwards, inmate #03128-095, convicted on 17 of 26 corruption charges, used to brag that he was better at it than Huey Long because, unlike Long, he never got shot.

SECOND? That study is a farce.

#03128-095 (a name bequeathed upon him by a respected public institution,) once ran against David Duke under the (unofficial) motto, "Vote for the crook. It's important."

John of Phoenix
08-12-2014, 03:46 PM
I used to be his pilot. The guy was hilarious. Everyone knew he was a crook (he all but admitted it) and they (well, most everyone) loved him.

KMacDonald
08-12-2014, 04:14 PM
What about the former Gov. McDonnell of VA trial? A juror was just released with no explanation given. Is it a case of jury tampering?