Abstract
The research paper identifies the problem of corruption in public administration. Meanwhile, it initially establishes the background of the emergence of corruption in a historical retrospective. Then the key factors of corruption in public administration and its negative consequences are explored. Special attention is devoted to lobbyism, public procurement, medicine, education, and military financing. Moreover, recommendations are also made to eradicate corrupt schemes, such as expanded penalties and registration of funding from third parties. It is also the implementation of electronic tenders and procurements and increased involvement of the societal and interested organizations to investigate corruption cases. Therefore, the study’s general objective is to explain the importance of this problem in the public administration sector and to provide solutions.
Introduction
Corruption is a serious threat to the rule of law, democracy, and human rights and is a fundamental problem in public administration. This is because there is not a single country that is not affected by corruption. The corrupt misuse of public office undermines people’s trust in government and institutions and makes public policies less effective and fair. It also robs taxpayers of funds that could have been used to build schools, roads, and hospitals. Meanwhile, the political will to construct solid and transparent institutions has the potential to reverse the wave of corruption. Thus, the origins of corruption in the U.S., the key challenges, and methods to combat it should be examined.
Background on the Issue
Corruption has been a harmful phenomenon since the first civilizations, and written sources emerged. Aristotle argued, “the most critical point in any state system is to organize affairs in such a way that officials cannot profit” (Peters, 2018, p. 54). Obviously, this issue has always concerned modern people. The young American state was no exception, despite the founding fathers’ dreams to create a model republic. During the presidency of Jackson, corruption became a permanent topic of partisan accusations (Peters, 2018). However, a significant increase in this phenomenon occurred in the 1850s for several reasons. The annexation of Texas and the speculative frenzy around Texas securities, the active sale of public fund lands in the West, and the booming railroad construction are one of them. There was also a struggle to expand the territory of slavery by pushing through Congress new compromise laws of 1850 and 1854, accompanied by the pursuit of profits through illegal speculation (Peters, 2018). These new phenomena of American life became a breeding ground for corruption at all levels, from the regional to the national.
The situation was complicated by the entrenched practice of distributing government positions and replacing almost all civil servants after the next presidential or local elections (spoils system). The electoral chase transformed into numerous irregularities during election campaigns and the elections themselves (Peters, 2018, p. 32). Whitman correctly criticized bossism, corruption, and political party intrigue in the nomination of presidential candidates. With the election of Democrat James Buchanan to the presidency in 1856, corruption scandals escalated. Members of the administration were named “buccaneers” by contemporaries for their corruptness (Peters, 2018, p. 64). John Floyd, Secretary of War, Isaac Tosey, Secretary of the Navy, and Howell Cobb, Secretary of the Treasury, were all implicated in illegal transactions. A considerable number of revelatory articles and appeals to fight corruption appeared on the pages of newspapers.
Ordinary Americans increasingly focused their hopes on liberating corruption and solving other problems on the Republican presidential candidate, Abraham Lincoln. Indeed, corruption was not the main and only issue for the country. Nevertheless, press-fueled corruption scandals shaped public opinion in both South and North, which could not but affect the bitterness of the Civil War of 1860-1865 (Peters, 2018). Thus, a study of corruption in U.S. history provides an opportunity to reflect on a number of lessons important to any democracy today. They are that corruption cases should not be silenced but rather subjected to the rigorous judgment of public opinion (Peters, 2018). In the U.S., broad openness and freedom of the press, civil society, political opposition, and mechanisms of public and legislative control provide a real opportunity to overcome corruption.
Presentation of the Importance of the Issue
The most entrenched, already historically global problem is corruption. According to research, in 2015, three in four Americans (75%) perceived corruption as widespread in government (Campos & Giovannoni, 2017, p. 917). In addition, this survey does not consider their personal attitudes toward state and local government. According to the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) ranking of countries, the U.S. scored 18th in 2016, along with Hong Kong and Ireland, with a mark of 74 (Campos & Giovannoni, 2017, p. 919). That is, according to this index, corruption in the U.S. is insignificant, which contradicts the opinion of Americans themselves, who consider corruption the second most important problem in the U.S., immediately after unemployment. One of the most common forms of corruption in the United States is lobbyism.
The lobbying technology that emerged from the English Parliament’s backstage has become extremely popular in the USA. The first amendment to the Constitution of the USA guarantees the right to freedom of speech and the possibility to address Congress. It was adopted in 1787 and is still the instrument of intervention of big corporations in the law-making processes and the legal guarantee of lobbyist manipulation in the USA (Campos & Giovannoni, 2017, p. 919). According to Sunlight Foundation research, U.S. corporations that invest in lobbying pay proportionately fewer taxes than those that do not contribute to lobbyists.
In the U.S., lobbyists designate themselves in the congressional register and do not hide the amount and people who pay them. An example of the intertwining of political and business interests is the figure of Ahmed Chalabi, head of the Iraqi National Congress, who, in 1998, promoted the Iraqi Liberation Act and lobbied the U.S. government to overthrow Saddam Hussein (Gokcekus & Sonan, 2017). The lobbying company Black, Kelly, Scruggs & Healey, a subsidiary of Burson-Marsteller and a P.R. tool of the U.S. Republican Party, became involved in the process. This activity considered the interests of American oil companies and the military-industrial groups (Gokcekus & Sonan, 2017). Therefore, lobbyism in the USA is a special form of corruption that operates within the law.
It is significant to mention that the U.S. government and its core institutions need to restore citizens’ trust in their performance. A new Transparency International survey, the U.S. Corruption Barometer, conducted in 2017 indicates that 44% of Americans consider corruption to be prevalent in the White House, compared to 36% in 2016 (Goldberg, 2018, p. 197). Meanwhile, about a third of African Americans surveyed believe the police are corrupt. Such assessments indicate that citizens are more critical of the fight against corruption in the public sector. Nearly 7 out of 10 people in the polls noted that the government’s efforts were minimal (Goldberg, 2018, p. 198). Hence, this demonstrates the distrust of U.S. citizens in public administration.
The significance of this problem also depends on the fact that corruption manifests itself in different ways in various areas of the public sector. For example, corruption schemes in the security and defense spheres may include patronage and bribes to ensure the purchase of military equipment from a certain company (Liu et al., 2017). Thus, the negative influence of this will be directed at the military, which means that soldiers may receive substandard food, clothing, or equipment. Another example of corruption in public administration can be noticed in health care. This can refer to kickbacks that patients have to pay to their doctors or the misuse of health care funds by civil servants and physicians.
In other words, confidence between patients and doctors disappears, and some groups cannot receive quality care due to a lack of funds. In education, corruption occurs when teachers demand bribes from their students during exams or modules (Liu et al., 2017). The public damage is that the overall quality of education is deteriorating. Common corruption schemes in the police and judicial system include manipulating cases and evidence by the police. Additionally, judicial decisions made to satisfy a privileged party are one manifestation of public corruption (Liu et al., 2017). All these corrupt schemes in government agencies lead to people’s frustration, distinction, and conflict.
Discussion and Recommendation for the Solution
It is significant to remark that the fight against corruption is constantly discussed at the highest levels of government. The reduction of corruption schemes in public administration is facilitated by the fact that in the U.S., there is virtually no immunity for officials (Andersson & Anechiarico, 2019). Any official, including the president, members of Congress, and senators, can be criminally prosecuted, albeit especially after removal from office. Thus, it is essential to promote the activities of a number of non-governmental organizations, such as Judicial Watch, Global Integrity, Projection on Government Oversight, and the Government Accountability Project (Andersson & Anechiarico, 2019). Accordingly, the organizations monitor donations to the election campaigns of politicians. Thus, they can report on what interests and spheres of influence certain politicians may have lobbied for.
The second most fundamental area of anti-corruption strategy in the U.S. is preventing corruption in the civil service. It is based on the introduction of the so-called “administrative morality,” which represents ethical and disciplinary norms; as a result, it has to be enhanced (Ceschel et al., 2022). The enforcement of these regulations is monitored by specially appointed persons in any government office or department. However, such verification takes a long time, and the fact that civil servants verify the integrity of other public servants may lead to increased corruption in government. Accordingly, it is crucial to involve ordinary citizens in such commissions and departments for them to assess possible violations of laws objectively.
Additionally, in this context, it should be mentioned that for an official, the consequences of being found to have committed violations can be expressed through applying one of the following penalties. These penalties include partial or total disqualification, relocation to a lower position, and an offer to terminate “conflicting” financial relationships (Doshi & Ranganathan, 2019). Only in the case of serious violations can criminal liability be imposed. Although to eliminate even the most minor forms of corrupt acts, it is possible to increase the penalties. For example, to introduce a norm, according to which officials have to compensate the damage in the double amount in case of participation in a corrupt scheme for the purpose of enrichment (Doshi & Ranganathan, 2019). Furthermore, engaging in corrupt acts in the public administration sector harms not only the interests of a particular area directly but also the welfare of all U.S. citizens. Accordingly, such officials should be excluded from public service without the right to be employed by the government or to participate in elections.
Moreover, to eradicate corruption in public administration, it is essential to apply such measures. Firstly, it is necessary to prohibit public officials for five years after their resignation from working in a company they control while in public service. For instance, an official dealing with medical issues and tenders cannot work in the companies involved in them for a set period (Sulitzeanu-Kenan et al., 2022). Correspondingly, such a rule increased the probability of exposing corrupt schemes and would simultaneously be a warning to officials about their involvement. In addition, compliance with new challenges in view of changing technology and opportunities for unscrupulous actions. The focus should be on high-risk areas such as procurement, revenue administration and natural resource management, and effective internal controls. For example, electric procurement systems can serve as massive tools to curb corruption by improving transparency and competition (Sulitzeanu-Kenan et al., 2022). It is also required to introduce changes in public administration policy in order to reduce the influence of the phenomenon of lobbyism.
First, lobbyist fundraising should be banned to minimize the risk of a corrupt scheme in which people with special interests buy favorable treatment from party members. Second, it is essential to prohibit members of Congress from receiving contributions from industries and groups under the jurisdiction of their committees. This will reduce the risk of conflicts and non-conflicts when crucial government decisions are made (Peters et al., 2021). This is because lawmakers will not be dependent on the funds of groups of influential individuals but will be empowered to work for the good of the American people. Expanding the disclosure of lobbying activities and their registration is also crucial. This will allow the public to understand who is spending money to attempt to influence the government.
Conclusion
Therefore, the flourishing of corruption in the government is one of the leading causes of ineffective public administration. In the United States, this manifests itself in the form of lobbying and the creation of illegal schemes in various areas in order to benefit. Accordingly, bribery or lobbying of interests provokes adverse consequences, affecting the tenders, competitions, and decisions of politicians. That is, critical areas such as health care, education, and national defense may not receive funding or receive poor-quality provisions. This affects the overall standard of living and conditions for all citizens, which is why it is necessary to fight corruption in public administration effectively. One way is to use electronic systems, register funds from third parties, or ban contributions. Meanwhile, it is essential to increase penalties for corrupt officials and impose restrictions on employment for former high-ranking officials.
References
Andersson, S., & Anechiarico, F. (2019). Corruption and corruption control: Democracy in the balance. Routledge.
Campos, N. F., & Giovannoni, F. (2017). Political institutions, lobbying and corruption. Journal of Institutional Economics, 13(4), 917-939. Web.
Ceschel, F., Hinna, A., & Homberg, F. (2022). Public sector strategies in curbing corruption: A review of the literature. Public Organization Review, 1-21. Web.
Doshi, S., & Ranganathan, M. (2019). Corruption. Keywords in Radical Geography: Antipode, 50, 68-73. Web.
Gokcekus, O., & Sonan, S. (2017). Political contributions and corruption in the United States. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 20(4), 360-372. Web.
Goldberg, F. (2018). Corruption and lobbying: Conceptual differentiation and gray areas. Crime, Law and Social Change, 70(2), 197-215. Web.
Liu, C., Moldogaziev, T. T., & Mikesell, J. L. (2017). Corruption and state and local government debt expansion. Public Administration Review, 77(5), 681-690. Web.
Peters, B. G. (2018). The politics of bureaucracy: An introduction to comparative public administration. Routledge.
Peters, B. G., Tercedor, C. A., & Ramos, C. (2021). The emerald handbook of public administration in Latin America. Emerald Group Publishing.
Sulitzeanu-Kenan, R., Tepe, M., & Yair, O. (2022). Public-sector honesty and corruption: Field evidence from 40 countries. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 32(2), 310-325. Web.