Breaking Corruption

There is a growing unease, generated by an apparent culture of corruption in governments throughout the world. Of course it has always been there, but in the face of another cycle of revelations, particularly in the USA, public awareness is again at a peak.
No doubt the media will soon judge that the public has had enough, and corruption will fade for a while as an issue. But while it is in the forefront issues and possible controls should be addressed. A typical response is: "New Jerseyans are becoming fed up with the political status quo," said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. "They don't trust politicians to clean up the system, which is why they give broad support to proposals that make these officials more directly accountable to the public."
The same article Courier News Gannett New Jersey goes on:New Jersey voters overwhelmingly say corruption is a major problem and they support the idea of having an elected state auditor and an elected attorney general, the poll by Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey newspapers found.
Disconnect
I don’t know if I’m the only one with a problem here. Surely if the problem begins with elected officials, electing more risks increasing rather than controlling corruption. The same dynamic applies, regardless of the position.
Putting aside, for now, the issues involved with appointing Federal and Supreme court judges, appointed oversight and auditing bodies work well in other places around the world and even in the USA.
The real issue, perhaps, is not the oversight personnel, or even how they are selected, it is the legislative or statutory frame work in which they operate. Governments can and do establish commissions and watchdogs for many reasons. Not least is an effort to bury issues before they get out of hand.
Yet there are now well tested guidelines which can be used as a basis for creating effective and essentially independent anti-corruption bodies. To my knowledge none of the effective bodies are elected, all are appointed and given unequivocal powers and responsibilities.
There will always be slip-ups in the best of situations; however I can only recall one breach by a person appointed under strong guidelines. That was within the Crime Commission of Western Australia and was dealt with quickly and efficiently.
Unfortunate Need
Call it human nature, but it seems our systems simply don’t work well without some kind of independent scrutiny. It only takes a few bad apples to spoil good government.
I have reservations about electing people to operate anti-corruption agencies. The electoral process itself tends to breed its own culture of corruption. Money and influence are too much ingrained into the process.
Still, in the end, more important to how an agency and its key personnel are put in place; the rules of operation are the vital ingredient. These must assure independence, fairness and have sufficient sweep and power to reign in corrupt practices.