Incentive

It's all too common. We hear about it all the time. There's been a leak. I'm not referring to the kind involving (actual) plumbers, but the kind that means that information is given to someone not authorized to have it, by someone in the know. Usually the “someone in the know” has an ax to grind or is prompted to do so for political purposes – like a “trial balloon,” an incriminating document, or the wholesale release of stolen files. And it's leaked to the media. (“Whistleblowers” fall into the category of leakers but may have different motives, although at times it may be hard to differentiate them from those with a political end.) Indeed, sometimes leakers are simply looking for personal publicity.

In a sense, leakers are bribers. There's an incentive. They're providing something in order to gain some kind of benefit from what they're doing. And bribery is common. It's a serious problem not only in the political arena, but far beyond that as well.

A bribe is the payment of anything of value to a public official (dog-catcher, policeman, state or national legislator – or candidate for such a position, restaurant or construction inspector, Cabinet member, assistant or adviser to one of those, etc.) or to anyone else who has some form of authority or knowledge that can be valuable to the one offering it, and helpful to the one receiving it. (Among the other types are payment for “inside information,” payment to a judge for a favorable decision, etc.) There may or may not be an explicit consideration for that payment at the time or in the future – the bribe may just be a “good-will” offering with no specified quid pro quo. The category includes statements and votes as well as tangible gifts. And it includes donations to the bribed individual's favored charity.

More often the payment will go to the official, his employee, or to a relative. It's a reasonable assumption that the official was aware of the bribe, even if it was not made directly to him but intended to reach him. If it can be demonstrated that he had no knowledge of the bribe he should be exonerated and the guilty parties prosecuted. (The official, however, should be more careful about who is in his employ or family.) If the briber is doing so on behalf of his own employer, that leader – not only the organization if any, but the individual(s) involved – should also be sanctioned. Greatly. But that's not always the case.

Despite the seriousness of the act it's a crime that isn't adequately punished. Of course it brings shame on those involved (often more for being caught than having participated in the forbidden behavior). But in politics some consulting position is likely to replace anything lost. And sometimes there is job loss or a fine, but these, which are usually the sum total of the costs of doing “business,” should only be the starting point.

Let me suggest some added reparations which should be demanded of those involved.

In addition to any existing penalties for whatever crime he may have committed, the bribed individual should pay into the public treasury a sum equal to twice the value of the bribe (or, if it is information, its potential value if it would accomplish what is expected of it – whether or not achieved), and he should be barred from holding any public position in the future. (The “future” includes the election taking place at the time the bribe is disclosed.) Association with any public official, or organization dealing with the government thereafter should be publicized and punished. Travel to a state or national capital should also be publicized much as the movements of sex offenders are.

Moreover, in addition to any existing penalties for whatever crime he may have committed, the briber, including former public officials, should pay into the public treasury a sum equal to twice the value of the bribe, and he also should be barred from holding any public position in the future. The bribe should be publicized to his constituents and employers. If it his employer (or its agent) who designated the bribe, that employer should pay into the public treasury ten times the value of the bribe, from his own assets – not the company, and he should be barred from holding a position of authority in that or any similar organization or organization that has dealings with the government. Association with any public official thereafter should be publicized along with travel to a state or national capital.

An individual who discloses a bribe (in which he doesn't participate) should be given the value of the bribe by both the briber and the person bribed. This would be in addition to whatever is paid to the public treasury. No individual should lose his job because of his disclosure of any illegal activity.

A public official who turns in a bribe-offerer should be paid by the briber the full value of the bribe for his (the official's) public use while the briber is subject to the penalties outlined above. (If the public official subsequently supports the cause of the briber it would be viewed as representing acceptance of the bribe and he should be punished accordingly.)

One final note: The bribe is not always obvious. It may result in the addition of a provision in some legislation – a provision that aids an individual, organization, or industry, or it may come in a form that “aids” constituents who will vote in the next election. Such bribes may be harder to identify or prove, but disclosure, and the light of unremitting publicity, may be helpful in discouraging their use. The media are good at flogging dead horses. (Fortunately not mine.)

Well, here I am on my high, but unflogged, horse. I'm imperious. And I'm certainly a loudmouth. It's easy to be virtuous. No one has ever given me a bribe. I have nothing to offer. There's no incentive to offer me an incentive.

January 15, 2017