The ethics of presidents are best understood by looking at the standards they create for those who work for them or the standards that are forced upon them by Congress or the courts. This article attempts to remove the radical distinction between normative values and ethical codes that dominates research in this area. Rather, a more interesting approach is to view codes, executive orders, and ethics systems as ethical metaphors that attempt to capture what presidents think public service is about. The article also focuses on the expansion of ethical standards for public officials and provides a historical sketch of ethics and presidents.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
1. Richard Neustadt, Presidential Power (New York: John Wiley, 1980).
2.
Dennis Thompson , Political Ethics and Public Office (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987).
3.
Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson, eds., Ethics and Politics (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1984).
4.
4. See Lewis, Ethics Challenge.
5.
5. Samuel Kernell, Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1993), p. 62.
6.
6. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter (New York: New American Library, 1961), Number 51, p. 322.
7.
7. Thompson, Political Ethics and Public Office.
8.
8. W. J. Michael Cody and Richardson R. Lynn, Honest Government: An Ethics Guide for Public Service (New York: Praeger, 1992), p. xviii.
9.
“Paradoxes of Government Ethics,”Public Administration Review (May-June 1992).
10.
Cooper Internal controls refer to “strengthening professionalism through training and socialization.”Responsible Administrator, p. 124. External mechanisms trust detailed guidance, while internal controls rely on developing human character.
11.
or Max DePree, Leadership as an Art (New York: Dell, 1988).
12.
12. George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), p. 3.
13.
idem, The Rule of Metaphor (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970).
14.
See also Murray Edelman, Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policies That Fail (New York: Academic Press, 1977), pp. 77-102.
15.
15. Since the beginning of the Republic, there have been over 12,000 executive orders issued by the president of the United States. These have legal standing for all members of the executive branch of the government and are enforceable as law. These orders can vary in content from restructuring of agencies to calling up the military reserves to imposing a national day of mourning.
16.
16. I realize that this attacks a major premise in much of the research on the American federal system. Without detailing sources, I will simply state that my experience in the federal service has convinced me that the separation of powers is more myth than reality.
17.
17. Allan Bloom, trans., The Republic of Plato (New York: Basic Books, 1968), bk. III, 413a-417b, pp. 92-96.
18.
18. Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, Federalist Papers, ed. Rossiter, Number 68, p. 414.
19.
19. Robert N. Roberts, White House Ethics: The History of the Politics of Conflict of Interest Regulation (New York: Greenwood Press, 1988), p. 8.
20.
20. Leonard D. White, The Federalists: A Study in Administrative History (New York: Macmillan, 1967), pp. 152-153.
21.
21. Ibid., p. 286.
22.
22. Ibid., p. 287.
23.
23. U.S., Congress, House, H. Document 130, 17th Cong., 1st sess., p. 7, 24 Mar. 1819.
24.
24. Leonard D. White, The Jeffersonians: A Study in Administrative History 1801-1829 (New York: Macmillan, 1967), p. 421.
25.
25. Leonard D. White, The Jacksonians: A Study in Administrative History 1829-1861 (New York: Macmillan, 1967), p. 433.
26.
26. See Executive Order 12674, as amended, Federal Register, 55(203), 19 Oct. 1990.
27.
27. Fred Albert Shannon, The Organization and Administration of the Union Army, 1861-1865 (Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1965), pp. 54-76.
28.
28. Roberts, White House Ethics, pp. 12-13.
29.
29. Ibid., p. 12.
30.
or, more recent, Andrei Shleifer and Robert W. Vishny, “Corruption,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, pp. 599-617 (Aug.1993).
31.
A muckraking approach to this same issue will be found in Brooks Jackson, Honest Graft: Big Money and the American Political Process (New York: Knopf, 1988).
32.
32. Riordan, Plunkitt of Tammany Hall, pp. 30-31.
33.
33. Roberts, White House Ethics, p. 15.
34.
34. In hindsight, Cleveland saw the extension of the civil service as the only way to control the ethical corruption of “partizanship” (sic). Grover Cleveland, The Independence of the Executive (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1913), pp. 40-41.
35.
35. Thomas A. Bailey, Presidential Saints and Sinners (New York: Macmillan, 1981), pp. 135-136.
36.
36. C. Van Woodward, ed., Responses of the Presidents to Charges of Misconduct (New York: Delacorte Press, 1974), p. 209.
37.
37. The Ballinger-Pinchot controversy revolved around Secretary of the Interior Ballinger's decision to remove the ban on mining Alaskan coal. Chief Forester Gifford Pinchot, a staunch “environmentalist,” accused Ballinger of having violated federal ethics law by representing private citizens in claims against the Department of the Interior. President Taft decided to dismiss Pinchot for insubordination! Taft was so embittered that he wrote a monograph to defend his behavior. See William Howard Taft, Ethics in Service (Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, 1942), p. 89.
38.
38. Woodrow Wilson, Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics (New York: Meridian Books, 1961), p. 187.
39.
39. This prohibition is currently codified at 18 U.S.C. § 209.
40.
40. See Roberts, White House Ethics, p. 27.
41.
41. Quoted in David McCullough, Truman (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992), p. 268.
42.
42. Roberts, White House Ethics, pp. 37-54.
43.
43. This included an inspection service for investigating and prosecuting, a new code of ethics, a creation of a bipartisan commission on ethics, and comprehensive financial reporting. From Roberts, White House Ethics, p. 51.
44.
These recommendations were memorialized by Senator Paul Douglas in the 1951 Godkin Lecture at Harvard and subsequently in a monograph. In this monograph is a blueprint for what is the contemporary ethics system in the executive branch of the federal government. Paul Douglas, Ethics in Government (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1952).
45.
45. U.S., Congress, Senate, Hearing before the Senate Committee on Armed Services on the Nomination of Charles E. Wilson to be Secretary of Defense, 83d Cong., 1st sess., 1953, p. 15.
46.
46. Roberts, White House Ethics, p. 66.
47.
This should not be construed as suggesting that the concern is unfounded. A recent government commission voiced some of the same concerns about the rules and procedures required for nomination of executive branch employees. See The Report of the President's Commission on the Federal Appointment Process (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1990).
48.
48. Thomas A. Bailey, Presidential Saints and Sinners (New York: Macmillan, 1981), pp. 239-240.
49.
49. Comer Van Woodward, Responses of the Presidents to Charges of Misconduct (New York: Delacorte Press, 1974), p. 384.
50.
50. “Prescribing Standards of Ethical Conduct for Government Officers and Employees,” Executive Order 11222, pt. II, § 201, 3(c).
51.
51. Richard Nathan, The Plot That Failed: Nixon and the Administrative Presidency (New York: John Wiley, 1975).
52.
52. Representative Patricia Schroeder, quoted in Dennis Thompson, “The Paradoxes of Political Ethics” (Speech, U.S. Government Ethics Conference, Virginia Beach, VA, 11-13 Sept. 1991).
53.
53. The current disclosure system has grown immensely. See 5 C.F.R. 2634 for a description of the public and confidential financial disclosure systems. In 1993, 22,830 individuals filed public disclosures in the executive branch and 298,869 individuals filed confidential disclosures.
54.
54. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 96 S.Ct. 612, 46 L. Ed. 2d 659 (1976).
55.
55. Adrian G. Duplantier, et al. v. United States of America, 606 F.2d 654 (1979).
56.
56. In 1988, Congress became so concerned about the potential illicit influence of the director of the Office of Personnel Management over OGE that it made OGE an independent agency.
57.
57. Roberts, White House Ethics, p. 172.
58.
58. From a speech by Michael Deaver at the Council of Government Ethics Laws Conference, New Orleans, LA, Nov. 1989.
59.
59. “September 12, 1988 Memorandum from the Director of the Office of Government Ethics... Concerning Guidance on Ethics Program Issues Raised in the Report of the Independent Council dated July 5, 1988,” Memorandum 88 X 13, The Informal Advisory Letters and Memoranda and Formal Opinions of the United States Office of Government Ethics: 1979-1988 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1989), pp. 813-835.
60.
60. To Serve with Honor:Report of the President's Commission on Federal Ethics Law Reform (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, Mar. 1989).
61.
61. Executive Order 12834 of January 20, 1993, Federal Register, 58(13), 22 Jan. 1993.
62.
62. These data are taken from the compilation of the OGE annual survey of DAEOs for 1993.
63.
63. See 5 C.F.R. 2635 subpart E.
64.
64. See Cody and Lynn, Honest Government, chap. 1.
65.
65. See Gerald Garvey, Facing the Bureaucracy: Living and Dying in a Public Agency (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993), pp. 154-202. In citing this book, I do not want to implicitly give credence to the accusations contained therein. Inspector General John Layton, in a recent conversation, recounted a perfectly plausible alternative explanation for what occurred, and one to which Professor Garvey chose not to give credence. The reason I cite this example is that it mirrors other cases with similar circumstances and results, which my current position prevents me from discussing.
66.
For a response to this charge, see James R. Richards, “Shedding More Light on Inspectors General,”Government Accountants Journal, 42(4):9-14 (Winter 1993-94).
67.
See also Alfred S. Neely IV, Ethics-in-Government Laws: Are They Too “Ethical”? (Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute, 1984).
68.
68. John P. Burke, “The Ethics of Deregulation—Or the Deregulation of Ethics?” in De-regulating the Public Service, ed. John J. DiIulio (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1994).
69.
69. Dennis F. Thompson, “Mediated Corruption: The Case of the Keating Five,”American Political Science Review, 87(2):377 (June 1993).
