Author Topic: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption  (Read 1849 times)

Skip8282

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7004
Re: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption
« Reply #25 on: October 26, 2010, 04:57:43 PM »
Of course haliburton had to compete. But just look at the details of that shit. They subcontracted a load of that shit. All under the theory that it would be at lower costs which didn
t happen.



You don't have a clue.  Without looking at the RFQ, how do you even know what the government was requiring to be sub-contracted out?  And what's your evidence that Haliburton made any such claim?

Lundgren

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 4441
  • Banned
Re: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption
« Reply #26 on: October 27, 2010, 05:36:46 AM »

You don't have a clue.  Without looking at the RFQ, how do you even know what the government was requiring to be sub-contracted out?  And what's your evidence that Haliburton made any such claim?
Your missing my point. I``m not trying to prove that it was corrupt. It`s simply WRONG that a situation goes unchallenged, and simple accepted. It`s a clear case of conflict of interest. Of course it was one of the few companies that could do that work, but that`s the problem. I`ll adresses the Haliburton issue in another thread if you like.

But that`s not the point. It`s that people are defending a smokey situation for no reason other than partisan politics. You`d probally gain voters more than loosing votes, for denouncing the war, and the organization around it.

Remember was pro ron pual, was for the war, would be for simliar wars in the future, however this war was far too rampant with possible conflicts of interest. I`m trying to remember advocates for the war that didn`t have something in it personally and I`m coming up with no one.  

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39387
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2011, 08:43:15 AM »
www.chicagotribune.com/news/elections/ct-met-emanuel-transition-final-20110226,0,2244383.story
chicagotribune.com

Emanuel transition team member resigns
Says her past ethics violations 'were careless mistakes,' but doesn't want 'distractions'
By Rick Pearson and John Chase, Tribune reporters

7:18 PM CST, February 26, 2011

Advertisement
 
 
A top member of Mayor-elect Rahm Emanuel's transition team abruptly resigned after the Tribune inquired about recent findings that she violated state ethics rules by using taxpayer resources for political purposes while serving as executive director of the Illinois Board of Higher Education.

Judy Erwin, a former state lawmaker who also co-chaired Emanuel's mayoral campaign, stepped down from her high-level state job last summer, was fined and promised to never seek a state job after conceding that she conducted political business on state time, according to a newly filed ethics report.

Erwin admitted using her office e-mail and phone while working on a campaign committee for then-presidential candidate Barack Obama, using staff resources to plan her trip to the 2008 Democratic National Convention and engaging in campaign fundraising activity while on the job, the state's Executive Ethics Commission ruled in a decision filed Feb. 16.

The state report went largely unnoticed, however, and Erwin told the Tribune she had not informed Emanuel of the findings before Friday, when the newspaper began its inquiries. She had been named to Emanuel's seven-member transition team just a day earlier.

Erwin's quick departure represents an early embarrassment for an incoming administration that gained a decisive victory last week after campaigning on themes that included bringing further ethics reforms to a city long known for its history of government corruption.

On Saturday, Emanuel spokesman Ben LaBolt said that no decision had been made on whether to replace Erwin on the transition team.

"Judy Erwin is a friend of Rahm's with a wealth of experience and he'll continue to consult her public policy knowledge," LaBolt said in a statement issued late Friday.

LaBolt said members of the transition team had been vetted. But he said the mayor-elect's team had not seen the Executive Ethics Commission report, which was filed days before the mayoral election. Earlier this month, Erwin also was named a managing director of ASGK Public Strategies, the former public affairs consulting firm of David Axelrod, who worked with then-chief of staff Emanuel in the Obama White House.

The ethics commission said Erwin cooperated with the investigation by the executive inspector general, reimbursed the state, agreed to pay a $4,000 fine and promised to never work for the state again. She resigned Aug. 15.

In an interview with the Tribune, Erwin said she got careless while she was very busy at work, cooperated with investigators and hoped her 30 years of history in state government would outweigh the ruling. She said neither Emanuel nor his campaign was aware of the issue before Friday.

"The bottom line is the mayor-elect has very important work to do and I certainly don't want to have any distractions," Erwin said. "I will be stepping aside from the transition. I don't want any distractions at all."

The inspector general investigation found that Erwin repeatedly violated the state prohibition on political activity between July 2008 and February 2009 and "co-opted" her staff by involving them in her activities.

"The atmosphere for IBHE employees must have been heavily colored by Ms. Erwin's political activity on the job," the ethics board said. It found "particularly troubling" her explanation that she made a campaign contribution to a state representative who was the chairman of the higher education appropriations committee: "This suggests that she was responding to a real or imagined pay to play incentive within state government."

Erwin said the probe "has been going on for a while. I couldn't have planned the timing this way."

"I made some mistakes. I regret them. They were careless mistakes and not intentional mistakes," she said.

Tribune reporter Bob Secter contributed.

rap30@aol.com

jchase@tribune.com

Copyright © 2011, Chicago Tribune

Gregzs

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17373
  • Getbig!
Re: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption
« Reply #28 on: December 13, 2013, 12:40:48 AM »
Updated for 2013

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101240001?__source=xfinity|mod&par=xfinity

Study details rampant government corruption worldwide

The bloody civil war in Syria is having yet another impact: The nation is now considered one of the most corrupt in the world, according to newly released data from the anti-corruption group Transparency International.

The organization's annual "Corruption Perceptions Index," first published in 1995, is one of the most closely watched barometers of the issue. The group surveyed experts on public sector corruption in 177 countries, grading each nation on a scale of zero to 100, with zero being "highly corrupt" and 100 being "very clean."

Syria has never been considered particularly virtuous, but growing attention to the business dealings of President Bashar al-Assad and his associates helped its score plunge to 17 from 26 in 2012. The country now ranks near the bottom—tied with Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan for 168th place. It ranked 144th last year.

But no nation has a monopoly on corruption, according to the study, which found that 70 percent of the countries scored 50 or below.

"The 'Corruption Perceptions Index 2013' demonstrates that all countries still face the threat of corruption at all levels of government, from the issuing of local permits to the enforcement of laws and regulations," Huguette Labelle, chair of Transparency International, said in a statement.

America's ranking

The U.S. turned in a mediocre performance, according to the study. The world's largest economy scored 73 in this year's index—identical to last year—which puts it in a tie with Uruguay for 19th place. Canada, Germany, Great Britain and Japan are among countries considered cleaner than the United States.

Transparency International and others have criticized the U.S. for relatively lax controls on money laundering. Other issues considered include campaign finance and government contracting. The U.S. has never finished higher than 14th (in 2000) and has come in as low as 24th (2011), though the organization says year-to-year comparisons can be misleading because of changes in methodology.

This year's least-corrupt countries are Denmark and New Zealand, which both scored 91. The most corrupt are Afghanistan, North Korea and Somalia, each scoring a mere 8 out of 100 points.

Russia matched last year's score of 28 points, finishing in a nine-way tie for 127th place. China improved by one point, for a score of 40, tying with Greece for 80th place.

That score is a marked improvement from a year ago, when Greece was in the depths of a financial crisis. The resulting reforms may have helped boost last year's score of 36 points, but it is still perceived to be the most corrupt country in the euro zone, the study said.

Global corruption

An alarming number of countries worldwide are infected with toxic levels of corruption, with more than two-thirds of the 177 nations included having unacceptably high levels of "abuse of power, secret dealings and bribery," according to a press release issued by Transparency International.

However, even top-performing nations struggle with undue influence exerted over government via backroom deals, campaign financing and awarding of government contracts.

Double-dealing, bribery and other forms of misconduct affect all categories and levels of government, ranging from a local municipal office issuing permits to a national government agency charged with enforcing laws and regulations. Controlling corruption in policing, justice systems and the activities of political parties is especially important, according to a press release that accompanied the results.

The index is based on data collected over the past two years by 13 different entities, including the Economist Intelligence Unit, the World Bank, and World Economic Forum. It rates each country examined on a scale from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 ("very clean").
Any rating below 50 is considered more corrupt than clean.

Five European Union member states earned scores below 50, including Italy, Greece, Romania, Slovakia and the Czech Republic.

Notwithstanding the occasional crack-smoking mayor, Canada also outranks the U.S. with a score of 81.

Countries that improved their standings on the index this year include Myanmar, Brunei, Lesotho, Senegal, Nepal, Estonia and Latvia.

Others that have lost ground this year include high-ranking Australia, Slovenia and Iceland, as well as Spain, the Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Libya, Mali, Eritrea, Mauritius, Yemen, Guatemala, Madagascar and Congo Republic.


The index, of course, is not without its limitations. It measures only about half of the 322 countries around the globe and focuses only on corruption in the public sector (government agencies, justice system, etc.).

Transparency International warns that countries ranking at the bottom of the index are not necessarily the most corrupt societies overall.

"Corruption remains notoriously difficult to investigate and prosecute" and will likely stymie efforts to tackle international scourges such as extreme poverty, climate change and economic crisis, Transparency International said in a press release.

The group calls on international bodies such as the G20 to "crack down on money laundering, make corporations more transparent and pursue the return of stolen assets."

scottt

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 325
Re: Worst-ever perception of U.S. corruption
« Reply #29 on: December 13, 2013, 06:03:25 AM »
If Bush owns stock in Halliburton and he used them for government work he is guilty of ethics violations.