I’m going to attempt analyzing ethical concerns of the key players involved in the Watergate Scandal. Firstly, I will define the ethical theories that I will be using to validate my findings. I will explore the role of key players using the following theories: deontological, teleological and virtue ethics. The first two are considered action – based theories of morality because they focus entirely upon the actions which a person performs. When actions are judged morally right based upon their consequences, we have a teleological or consequentiality ethical theory. When actions are judged morally right based upon how well they conform to set of duties, we have a deontological ethics. With the virtue based- ethical theory, it doesn’t judge action as right or wrong but rather the character of the person doing the actions. The person in turn, makes moral decisions based upon which actions would make one a good person. Here are the main characters of this epic national Watergate conundrum:
Archibald Cox- Special Prosecutor:
A Special Prosecutor is a Barrister from outside government selected by the Attorney General to probe and possibly prosecute a federal government official for wrong doing while in office. The theory behind appointing such an individual is that there is a built in conflict of interest at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and officials who may have political or government connections with the department. Thus, such a position is very significant to ensure the universal application of the Rule of Law to all citizens.
Archibald Cox’s position to persistently request that the president release the secret recordings to divulge weather the president is innocent or guilty raised the ethical question, if it is morally right to do so. Another ethical question that faced Cox as we would all agreed in this class is whether it was appropriate to indict a sitting president? The president was accused to provide cover up for member of his re-election campaign in the burglary of the Democratic Headquarters.
Deontologists argues that to make a moral choice, we simply have to understand what our moral duties are and what correct rules exist which regulates those duties. When we follow our duty, we are behaving morally, verse versa. Cox chooses to be Chauvinistic and defend the constitutional which stated that, the president is only a primus inter pare. He shows his true north with this statement after he was fired. “Whether ours shall continue to be a government of laws and not of men is now for Congress and ultimately the American people {to decide}” (Berber, 1985).
Elliot Richardson- Attorney General/ William Ruckelshaus – Richardson’s Successor:
Another ethical issue arose when Nixon order Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox to be fired. Attorney General Elliot Richardson and his Deputy William Ruckelshaus were both fired because they refused to fire Cox. Robert Bork, another character whose role will be discussed shortly in the next stage ultimately carried out Nixon’s order. The ethical and moral question that derives from the reasoning of these two officials is whether it was ethical or moral for them to turn down the Executive request to sack Cox?
I do not want to seem cynical of the Executive, but I would like to embrace the teleological theory for the prudency of these two statesmen. Teleological theory argues that in order to make correct moral choices, we have to have some notion of the effects from our choices. That is, when we make choices which have positive effects, then we are acting morally, verse versa. In the case of Richardson and Ruckelshaus acted rationally. The positive consequences of their action are, they set precedence for fundamental supremacy of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the model of world democracy, because it promotes fundamental human rights. This case shows that it works and the effectiveness of the legal process became apparent as the investigation and prosecution continued.
Some of the ways the system worked included:
• The First Amendment allowed stories in the Washington Post to break Watergate open and also led to stories about other abuses of power; the stories were based largely on information from an unnamed source called “Deep Throat” (Warren
• The Senate hearings headed by Sen. Sam Irvin and the house impeachment proceedings showed the importance of the Congressional oversight responsibility.
• The independent judiciary was able to initiate an investigation, which a non- independent judiciary likely could not have done; and The Saturday Night Massacre resulted in the largest spontaneous outpouring of outrage from the public that the White House had ever experienced. The precedent set by them was followed by Congress during Clinton
These positive outcomes are due to the fearless characters of these two men for the happiness of citizens of the United States, and those around the world to protect the Constitution, since democracy is been emulated everywhere, as opposed for the happiness of the White House.
Robert Bok- Solicitor General:
Furthermore, after the forceful resignation of Richardson and Ruckelshaus, Robert Bork then Solicitor General fired Cox and attempted to blandish news outlets in favor of his loyalty to the President, because he felt he has the moral responsibility to do so. In his defense, he stated that the difference between him and Richardson was that, he has never made any commitment under oath to the House of Congress for his deeds (Garofalo and Geuras, 2011). The ethical question for his action is, did he act morally and ethically in carrying out the president’s order? His argument sounds elusive, moot and hokum to the issue at hand, and created many legal, moral and ethical quandaries for the Nixon White House. One may want to believe that his actions are influence by quid quo pro, or just blind loyalty to the president. He purely exhibited incompetence and absolute arrogance about the law. He exhibited an attitude of hubris which was not in confluence with the virtue theory.
The virtue ethics places much less emphasis on which rules people should follow, and instead focus on helping people develop good character traits, such as kindness and generosity. These character traits will in turn, allow a person to make the correct decisions later on his life. Virtue theorists also emphasize the need for individuals to learn how to break bad habits of character, like greed and anger. The biography of Bok shows his power of persuasion, his wife used to be a Catholic Sister, and he charmed her to give that up. She later became an activist and subsequently his wife (Berber, 1985). There are fingerprints of these characteristics of his early lifestyle in trying to squelch criticisms against his position which led to further cleavage between the Nixon administration, the citizens and Congress. These vices would have been virtuous if he only realized that he has a moral authority to the people of the United States
However, Bok acted in accordance with the six pillars of character in protecting his boss, the president. He was trustworthy, very honest to the president, the news media and the American people as to why he was protecting the president, despite the pervasive corruption in his administration. He was also reliable; he keeps his promise to the president to fire his opponents and circumvent all attempts by Congress to stop him. His loyalty to the presidency is unquestionable despite his menial omniscience of presidential powers which makes his law degree looks frivolous to me. I admired his intrinsic true north in attempting to save the presidency of Nixon.
Richard Nixon- President/ Primus Inter Pares:
President Nixon was suspected of massive cover up to obviate his administration’s involvement in the Watergate scandal. The president refused to hand over secret recordings of telephone conversations from the White House to Special Prosecutor, Archibald Cox by claiming Presidential Confidentiality. First let me review the oath taken by any U.S.
It was unconstitutional for Nixon to claim presidential confidentiality for the recordings, because they were not recorded in his private home. The White House is a Federal Building occupied by public officials assumed infallible to carry out altruistic agendas for the American people. The crimes being investigated are crimes that are pivotal in preserving the Constitution, of which the president has taken oath to protect and defend. The “Presidential Confidentiality” claim also violates the six pillars of characters, especially integrity portion of it, and espoused the four enemies to integrity to save his presidency. Namely, self- interest (things we want), self- deception (a refusal to see a situation clearly), Self- Protection (things we don’t want), and self-righteousness (an end justifies the means attitude), (Berman and West, p, 12), these enemies of integrity confluence the embattled administration which was desperately fighting to avoid both political and judicial linchpin.
However, his timely resignation to save the country from a protracted legal battle during war time morally portrayed him as a responsible man, but White House critics would say, his resignation instead of being honest to the American people was due to his narcissism and hokum deceitful inner circle advisers. This is evident in his prudence speech “I am not a crook.” He was responding to reporters after a press conference at Disney World about the Watergate money trail in Washington. His response goes as “And do, that is where the money came from. Let I just say this to the television audience: I made mistakes, but in all of my years of public life, I have never profited, never profited from public service- I have earned every cent. And in all my years of public life, I have never obstructed justice. And I think, too, that I could say that in my years of public life that I welcome this kind of examination, because people have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I am not a crook. I have earned everything I have got”, (http://youtu.be/sh163n1lJ4M, obtained September 9, 2011).
My recommendation to current and future leaders is to follow the five principles of ethical leadership, respect others, builds community, servers others, manifests honesty and impartial justice for all (Berman and West, p, 49).
Bibliographies
Adapted from the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court, Scholastic Inc, accessed on September 5, 2011.
Barber, James David. The Presidential Character, 3d ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1985.
Barber, Sotirios A. The Constitution and the Delegation of Congressional Power: Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975.
Berman, Evan M and West, Jonathan. The Ethics Edge 2nd Edition (ICMA Press, Washington DC. 2006).
Garofalo, Charles and Geuras, Dean, Practical ethics in Public Administration 3rd Edition (Management Concepts: Vienna, Virginia, 2011).
http://youtu.be/sh163n1lJ4M, accessed September 9, 2011.
Warren, Kenneth F. Administrative Law in the American Political System. St. Paul: West, 1982.
By Gershon Bai-Lama Bangura
All rights reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment