"Political Culture of the [Corrupt] Municipality
Many local governments have an established political culture with certain expectations and practices that often determine what is seen as acceptable and not acceptable in local politics. In municipalities with an undeveloped or underdeveloped political culture, accountability and legitimacy is usually low and principles of ethics in government are not established. This can encourage corruption to take hold in the local government because citizens do not know what is considered corrupt, and local officials are not afraid to be corrupt because of the low accountability. In some places the local governments have been corrupt for so long that the citizens think that is how it is supposed to work because that is all they have been exposed to. "
Emphasis added.
Above is an excerpt from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_local_government
Monday, February 14, 2011
Saturday, August 21, 2010
The Gate Counter Challenge
Well, it was great to meet my team at breakfast this morning. They have a wonderful sense of humor about this but appear very professional. They all look just like an attendees and one middle aged woman even brought her kids and her sister. They all fit right in with their tan shorts or blue jeans, summer shirts, canvas bags and sunglasses.
I especially encourage you to say "hello" to them and to try to throw them off their game. I put a bonus on the table for the ones stay the steady course and don't reveal their hands.
So if any of you can get any one of them to admit who they are, just respond here with a description of the person, along with a description of what they are wearing, and, if you are right, I will give YOU a "bonus" too.
But, for now, I am off to get more pumpkin and squash for tomorrow's breakfast--squash pancakes were a big hit!
I especially encourage you to say "hello" to them and to try to throw them off their game. I put a bonus on the table for the ones stay the steady course and don't reveal their hands.
So if any of you can get any one of them to admit who they are, just respond here with a description of the person, along with a description of what they are wearing, and, if you are right, I will give YOU a "bonus" too.
But, for now, I am off to get more pumpkin and squash for tomorrow's breakfast--squash pancakes were a big hit!
Labels:
Accountability,
Cooked Books,
Transparency
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Mark My Words: Obama's Mosque Statements
Ok, let's analyze the basics of this Obama Mosque comment:
1. Obama is a government representative. In fact, he is the "top" government executive in this country.
2. Obama's statement was simply to describe what powers or rights the government did NOT have. His words were not suggesting that there was any real right of the government to interfere with a religious institution's plan to build a facility.
3. As far as we the public know, this government executive was never formally asked to interfere with or to use government authority to influence a religious institution's plan to build a religious facility.
So why even make the statement? Why use government authority to say that you won't use government authority? On its face, it appears as an incredibly hollow and stupid thing to do, especially if you are the top executive government officer. He is saying "Look, I am interfering to say that I won't interfere." That act, in and of itself, disproves the statement. Doesn't anyone else see the irony here?
Let's not forget the possibility that the act itself is the message that he wants to give--suggesting in a passive-aggressive way that he indeed will use government authority to intervene if he feels it necessary. That explanation does not describe an incredibly stupid act. That would be a just stupid act. Why? Well, because its a manipulative and deceptive way for a public official to try to get want he wants.
And, even though the public may not be able to put words to that, they will certainly feel it and react accordingly. So, in either case, this is the kind of act that ends up producing an insidious erosion of relationships and authority for a politician. And, this will be interesting to watch over the next two years.
1. Obama is a government representative. In fact, he is the "top" government executive in this country.
2. Obama's statement was simply to describe what powers or rights the government did NOT have. His words were not suggesting that there was any real right of the government to interfere with a religious institution's plan to build a facility.
3. As far as we the public know, this government executive was never formally asked to interfere with or to use government authority to influence a religious institution's plan to build a religious facility.
So why even make the statement? Why use government authority to say that you won't use government authority? On its face, it appears as an incredibly hollow and stupid thing to do, especially if you are the top executive government officer. He is saying "Look, I am interfering to say that I won't interfere." That act, in and of itself, disproves the statement. Doesn't anyone else see the irony here?
Let's not forget the possibility that the act itself is the message that he wants to give--suggesting in a passive-aggressive way that he indeed will use government authority to intervene if he feels it necessary. That explanation does not describe an incredibly stupid act. That would be a just stupid act. Why? Well, because its a manipulative and deceptive way for a public official to try to get want he wants.
And, even though the public may not be able to put words to that, they will certainly feel it and react accordingly. So, in either case, this is the kind of act that ends up producing an insidious erosion of relationships and authority for a politician. And, this will be interesting to watch over the next two years.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Mark My Words: Bell's Rizzo a Follower, Not a Leader
You know Bell, California's corrupt city manager couldn't have come up with his scheme all on his own. He surely must have gotten some tips on how to bilk the taxpayers out of 1.5 million a year from someone else.
This is one of those things where the backstory will be just as interesting and compelling as the front page articles. Why? Because my experience suggests that there is currently much co-opting of the democratic and representational principals of our government system, and that Bell's leaders are not the outlier, but the norm.
This is one of those things where the backstory will be just as interesting and compelling as the front page articles. Why? Because my experience suggests that there is currently much co-opting of the democratic and representational principals of our government system, and that Bell's leaders are not the outlier, but the norm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)