When it comes to the importance of checking state and local politicians, I think it is extremely important to a certain extent. Any job should require some background check when the job is publicly related. Police officers for instance have an extensive background check if they have suspicion of a current or upcoming officer. Officers can contact a number of friends, relatives, bosses, etc. of the officer to ask questions, in hopes of catching the individual of guard. I feel that this is somewhat necessary for someone that we are supposed to trust to protect and serve our communities. It seems that even though United States soldiers have probably the most patriotic job in the country, although they do not need such a background check because of the demand for soldiers. Besides the demand, I think that it doesn’t matter all that much for some jobs. A politician, is someone the state, or communities needs to trust for much larger issues than protecting and serving. Not only do they have the power to move mountains, locally and nationally, but they hold somewhat of a role model position. These politicians are expected to be the best, most honorable, trust worthy citizens, eligible for such a job. The public sees this, sometimes too much through rhetorical situations, but sees it none the less. A politician is comparable to the president of the United States, professional athletes, and anyone that holds the title of a role model. I feel they should have a very extensive background check, but there is a place to draw the line.
Neil Goldschmidt for example seemed to be the definition of a stereotypical politician, by that I mean holding all the positive qualities I previously stated. He did a tremendous amount of work for Portland and surrounding areas, and brought about much needed and appreciated commitment. When someone is to pry back into his life to determine if he was a good person, so to speak, back twenty years, I would say that there was no need for that. On the other hand if any suspicions happened to surface in the years of his employment, I would definitely feel they should be investigated. Not saying that any human being capable of committing any crime like that, shouldn’t be convicted to the fullest extent. Just that spending so much time and money on somebody, could be spent so much better somewhere else.
The Iran-Contra affair survives as one of the most dramatic political scandals in American history. Approximately a decade after Watergate, the Iran-Contra scandal both shocked and captivated the public. The affair began in Beirut, 1984, when Hezbollah, a militant Islamic group sympathetic to the Iranian government, kidnapped three American citizens. Four more hostages were taken in 1985. The conservative Reagan administration hurriedly sought freedom for the Americans. Despite a 1979 trade embargo prohibiting the sale of weapons between the U.S. and Iran, members of Ronald Reagan’s staff arranged an arms-for-hostages deal with Iran in an attempt to free the American hostages in Lebanon. Meanwhile, back in the Americas, Reagan was pursuing an aggressive foreign policy in response to the Cold War. The Reagan administration was doing its best to curb Communist influence in Central and Latin America. In Nicaragua, Reagan wanted to support the democratic rebel Contras against the Marxist Sandinista regime, despite legislation passed in the early 1980s, the Boland Amendment, that made federal aid to the Contras illegal. In 1985, Oliver North, a staff member in the National Security Council, devised the scheme to divert surplus funds from weapons sales with Iran to the Contra cause in Nicaragua, violating the Boland Amendment. Following public exposure of the scandal, Oliver North and many other members of Reagan’s staff were put on trial; however not a single one of them was appropriately punished. Each person involved was either pardoned, granted immunity or had convictions overturned. The Iran-Contra scandal and its aftermath exposed both the executive branch’s lack of accountability to the American people and the other branches of g...
...FO at the Houston airport. While Mr. Fastow's parents were undergoing a random search, he stopped to chat with Mr. Schwieger. "I never got an opportunity to explain the partnerships to you," he said, according to Mr. Schwieger. Mr. Schwieger replied, "With everything that has come to light, I probably wouldn't like the answer I would have gotten."
Enron deliberately created artificial shortages in California for electricity, two days in a row, causing the price to skyrocket. Enron is a natural gas and electricity plant/business that buys and sells energy. The most influential historical event that has happened during the 21ST century is The Enron Scandal because the loss sustained by investors exceeded $70 billion and only a small amount of the lost money was returned.
Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).
Good Times is an American sitcom that starred a poor, African-American family, the Evans, living in the projects of south side Chicago in the 70s. The show followed the everyday lives of the family as Florida and James Evans raised their three children-- Thelma, JJ, and Michael. Good Times touched on real controversial issues of the time with humor from an African-American standpoint. Topics such STD’s among young people, gun violence, crime, adoption and many more were subjects brought to the homes of fans. It has been nearly 40 years since Good Times last aired, and the problems addressed on the show are still prevalent today. These matters have remained of concern over the years and although progress has been initiated there is still a long road towards improvement in society through change.
The mistrust most Americans feel toward the government officials and political parities of today can be traced back to the Watergate scandal of 1972, which led to the resignation of an American president. The crimes of the Watergate scandal included political burglary, bribery, extortion, wiretapping (phone tapping), conspiracy, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, tax fraud, illegal use of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), illegal campaign contributions, and use of taxpayers' money for private purposes.
For many people, the first word that comes to mind when they think about the Nixon administration is Watergate, the political scandal the scarred the sacredness of the White House during the 1970’s. Was Watergate necessary, and did he need to be so paranoid about others? Did Nixon have a choice in resigning? Watergate was an unnecessary event that led to Richard Nixon’s downfall.
Watergate Burglary Thesis: Governor Willie Starkie surrounded himself with people that were crooked, just like President Richard Nixon. The people who were in charge of getting Nixon elected did what was necessary to get Nixon elected. I. Watergate first break in occurred on May 28, 1972. A. The burglars attempted to unscrew a lock.
The hearings held by the Senate Watergate Committee, in which Dean was the star witness and in which many other former key administration officials gave dramatic testimony, were broadcast through most of the summer, causing devastating political damage to Nixon. The Senate investigators also discovered a crucial fact on July 13: Alexander Butterfield, deputy assistant to the President, revealed during an interview with a committee staff member that a taping system in the White House automatically recorded everything in the Oval Office—tape recordings that could prove whether Nixon or Dean was telling the truth about key meetings. The tapes were soon subpoenaed by both Cox and the Senate.
Many people argue that the legislative branch is run by few big interest groups because of their massive contributions against very small contributions from individuals. In a democratic society, power must be shared equally among its citizens, but is that the case in the United States? The answer is simply no, and by limiting their overall spending on elections, policymakers will listen and pay more attention to the public interest over the special interest. Also, by revealing the freeloaders’ names, people will have more knowledge of who is representing them and who has tended to benefit those who made contributions to their campaigns. Finally, prohibiting the spending on food, entertainment and gifts to legislative branch employee will also reduce the corruption in the legislative
The United States Justice System is founded on In it's historical context, Watergate was not a surprising development when it is considered that Nixon was a paranoid personality capable of using any avenue to insure that his political objectives were attained. He had proved that early in his political career in his famous Checkers speech. By the early 70's however the nation had changed. It wasn't as easy to dupe the public with sappy speeches to explain away political indiscretions. The country was seriously concerned about our involvement in Southeast Asia and how the administration was going to extricate itself from the disaster. The media was on the job during this watershed period in our political history.
Political leaders of the United States were, at one time, thought of as crucial members of our society. Ideally, their main goal was to represent and satisfy the needs of the American people. Unfortunately, over the last fifty years, our trust in our administrative representatives has drastically declined. Beginning with the great conspiracy theory that President John F. Kennedy’s assassination in 1963 was actually planned by political leaders, America had, for the first time in history, begun to question its faith in its very own government. Consequently, the American people became extremely hesitant when it came to electing officials into office. Despite his loss to JFK in the 1960 presidential election, in 1968, Richard M. Nixon was elected as the thirty-seventh president of the United States. He was praised by many for his comeback after previously losing an election and seemed to be an admirable man. While in office, Nixon made many achievements and followed through with all of his promises made during his campaign. For the first time in what seemed like forever, the American people had finally elected a leader who seemed unquestionably trustworthy – or so they thought. Unfortunately, shortly after Nixon was elected to his second term of presidency in 1972, the Watergate Scandal changed America forever by creating a sense of mistrust toward the government for the American people because of The Nixon Administration’s actions.
White collar crime is a term created by Edwin Sutherland in 1939 that refers to crimes committed by people of higher social status, companies, and the government according to the book “White-Collar Crime in a Nutshell” by Ellen Podgor and Jerold Israel. White collar crimes are usually non-violent crimes committed in order to have a financial-gain (Podgor and Israel 3). A very well known white collar crime that has even been taught in many history classes is the Watergate scandal. This is a white collar crime that was committed by government authorities. Watergate was a crime that shocked the nation.
of the suspects had an address book with the name and phone number of a
The hiring process can be overwhelming for a company, but the organization needs to make sure all information is gathered in regards to an applicant. The company needs to investigate and take the time to fully get to know the applicant before and after a job interview. Just because an applicant interviews very well and he/ she states they are a loyal, respectful, and law abiding citizen, the potential employer still needs to investigate and conduct a thorough background and reference check. These two investigations can reveal a lot about the applicant and it will also give the potential employer the chance to talk to past employers about the individual to get an accurate account of the individual’s job performance. Background and reference checks are very important for companies to implement and the results could help the company gain a better understanding of how