| Some politicians are suspected of being corrupt and others trade favors to get elected, but the underlying impetus for these behaviors is the need for cash. Only candidates who align themselves with the moneyed interests have a chance of winning elections. The dilemma faced by candidates is whether to accept contributions and the possibility of winning an election, or to decline contributions and stand no chance of winning. This paper will discuss the need for campaign contributions for political elections, the types of people and entities who provide the contributions, and the unstated return of investment for their contribution. The issue discussed is whether the electoral process primarily represents citizens or corporations, and whether the government will favor corporate interests over what is best for the general public. The research concludes that all individuals, whether in the public sector or the private sector, act in their own interest. Further, politicians and bureaucrats can be expected to allocate taxpayer dollars in ways that benefit them personally, while being exempted from the same laws and standards they set for the general public. Recommendations are made suggesting that this double standard be eliminated and that legislators be held to the same level of accountability as other government employees. Rather than minimally regulating the irresponsible behavior of legislators, the same ethics rules regarding the acceptance of gifts should apply to all government employees.;Keywords: Economic Crime Management, Dr. Shannon Johnson, fundraising, donations, bribery, ethics, and reform. |
