I am trying hard not to deal with the topic of the recent avalanche of
federal government scandals from a political (or, at least, a partisan) perspective. This blog is about the Enron prosecutions, and there is probably no better example than the Enron cases of the damage that can be done to justice when politics intrudes on what should be an apolitical and objective matter. After all, it was the Bush Administration who told the Department of Justice (DOJ) to “get scalps quickly” at Enron even though, as federal prosecutors have written, there was scant evidence of criminal activity at the company. The Bush Administration did this in a misguided attempt to immunize itself politically from the criticisms of Democrats who, at the time, were attacking Bush every chance they got. Because Enron was a Texas-based corporation and Enron CEO, Ken Lay, knew Bush personally, the Bush Administration felt that it must proactively hammer Enron in order to avoid partisan attacks from the Democrats. As a result of this political and partisan squabbling, innocent people at Enron and their families have been irrevocably harmed.
I find this recent article about how the President would be indicted by the DOJ if he were a CEO entirely relevant to the situation Jeff Skilling faced. Unlike President Obama, Skilling was held accountable for everything that took place at Enron, even those activities for which the evidence clearly showed he had no direct knowledge. However, unlike Obama, Skilling did not invoke the “Sargeant Schultz” (“I know nothing”) defense. To the contrary, Skilling took responsibility for everything and answered all questions, both in front of Congress and at his trial. Indeed, Skilling actually appeared to have researched the issues thoroughly beforehand, so that he clearly knew a lot more about the topics than anybody who questioned him. We actually learned a lot more about the issues from Skilling than were ever revealed (or researched) by the Congress and the DOJ.
However, the issues regarding the federal government are much bigger than just the Enron witch hunt. Think about it. If the issues of most white collar criminal cases are about financial irregularities and lying, then is there any corporation in recent history that has sunk as low on those issues as the U.S. federal government? We know that government budgets, when one is actually presented, are so bogus that they have little meaning. And we know that federal government officials spin so much in their public comments that what they say would be called outright lying if anybody other than a government official said it. If we consider the U.S. taxpayers as the shareholders of the federal government, then Americans are robbed by an inefficient and dysfunctional government at a rate and level that dwarfs any harm down to shareholders by corporations.
I am not trying to tell Americans not to be skeptical of big business. I like skepticism. What I am suggesting is that we should extend our skepticism to big government. After all, the U.S. federal government is the most powerful entity and the largest monopoly in the modern world. If you distrust big business, then you should be downright wary and incredulous of big government!
