My Beauty Best Teacher

We present the concluding part of Rina Okonkwo's article on corruption see part 1 here:

The military coup of January 15, 1966 was a direct response to the corruption of the First Republic. The popular support for the coup showed that people rejected corruption. Despite the brutality of killings of First Republic politicians, there was widespread rejoicing in the country for the acts. The assassinations of the Minister of Finance Chief FS Okotie-Eboh, who was notorious for flaunting his ill-gotten wealth, Premier of the Western Region, Samuel Akintola, nicknamed “rigging” and Ahmadu Bello, Sardauna of Sokoto, the Premier of the Northern Region, “whose wardrobe was the most elaborate in the world,” were applauded.13 The coup eliminated “the old brigade of politicians who were destitute of public spirit.” 14

The Ironsi government instituted a series of commissions of inquiry into affairs of the Nigeria Railway Corporation, the Electricity Corporation of Nigeria, Nigeria Airways, and the Nigeria Ports Authority. The report on the Ports Authority revealed that a number of ministers, including Okotie-Eboh, Ribadu, and R.Njoku had formed companies and used their influence to secure contracts.15 In Nigeria Airways, the minister, K. O. Mbadiwe had interfered with award of contracts to a company not registered in the register of companies. K.O. had gone against the board to send “Operation Fantastic,” the maiden flight of Nigeria Airways to New York. Friends and relations of the minister travelled free to New York. Many stayed on in the United States. Chief Dafe, the chairman of the board, was found guilty of hiring many unnecessary party workers in the airline. “Chief Dafe did not know the difference between Nigeria Airways and the party headquarters of the NCNC.” 16

Dr. Ikejiani, Chairman of the Nigerian Railway Corporation, was found guilty of misallocation of funds and disregarding the Board and recognized procedures of the NRC. When Ikejiani became the Chairman, he was in debt. Ikejiani left the NRC with a fleet of cars and buildings. The building of the Railway medical centre, which was estimated cost L75, 000, was inflated to L440, 000. The inquiry thought Ikejiani had diverted railway funds to build his private hospital. The architect for the medical center designed a building for Ikejiani in Lagos free of charge. The panel recommended that Ikejiani never again hold public office. 17

The zeal to punish the wrong doers of the First Republic died with the Gowon coup of July 1966. The politicians in detention were freed. Corruption increased. “Youths knew no other life than corruption.” “One could steal if he shared with those in the right places.”18

The coup of 1975 was an attempt to end corruption. Murtala Mohammed began by declaring his assets and asking all government officials to follow his example. Murtala instituted a series of probes of past leaders. The Federal Assets Investigation Panel of 1975 found ten of the twelve state governors in the Gowon regime guilty of corruption.
One of the exonerated military governors, Rotimi, was later appointed to head a commission of inquiry in 2000. The guilty persons were dismissed with ignominy and forced to give up property in excess of earnings.

The Belgore Inquiry investigated the “Cement Armada.” The Gowon government had imported sixteen million metric tons of cement at a cost of N557 million. Millions of Naira was lost in demurrage charges, as the cement rotted in the seas outside of Lagos. The ports were too congested to enable ships off-load their cargoes. The inquiry noted that the Ministry of Defence needed only 2.9 million tons of cement at a cost of N52million. The orders were inflated for private profit at great cost to the government.19

State governments held similar commissions of inquiry. Corrupt officials were dismissed with immediate effect and asked to refund the money they had stolen. Murtala was assassinated after only two hundred days in office. The Obasanjo regime did not show the same zeal in its prosecution of wrongdoers.

The Second Republic, under President Shehu Shagari, saw a resurgence of corruption. Shagari was ineffective in stopping the looting of public funds by the democratically elected officials. On December 31st, 1983, General Buhari led a popular coup with the aim of halting corruption. Buhari arrested the state governors and commissioners and brought them before tribunals of inquiry. All accounts of politicians were frozen.

In less than two years, Babangida replaced the reformist Buhari regime. The next fourteen years saw no serious attempt to stop corruption. Leaders found guilty in tribunals under Mohammed and Buhari found their way back to public life and recovered seized property. Wole Soyinka observed that for Abacha to launch a war against corruption was a “huge joke.”

The Third Republic has instituted numerous commissions of inquiry. The Oputa panel and the Akanbi Commission have investigated corruption. Yet all the commissions of inquiry and reports have not stopped corruption. The Transparency Index rated Nigeria the number two corrupt country in the world in 2001.

An historical look at corruption in Nigeria demonstrates that rhetoric against corruption does not end corruption. All the inspiring words of our leaders and journalists have not changed anyone. We have heard the most eloquent appeals and strongest language castigating wrongdoers to no avail. Azikiwe and Shagari were two excellent writers who did not act to stop corruption of their party members and colleagues.

From our survey of corruption in Nigeria, it would appear that change in Nigeria must come from the grass roots and not from the leaders. The British realized, as far back as 1947, that an educated, enlightened citizenry was the key to stopping corruption. Government could not legislate an end to corruption. Punishment of wrongdoers, while necessary, was not sufficient to stop corruption.

In his comparison of corruption in Nigeria and Britain, Ronald Wraith pointed to the need for education in good character and the importance of diffusion of wealth, power, and education in the society. There was need to build a tradition of disinterested public service. In Britain, responsible government began with the emergence of people who entered government service after they had amassed substantial wealth. They joined government, not to increase their fortunes, but to contribute to the country. When the people of Nigeria reject corruption, they will demand and receive good behavior from their leaders.

Rina Okonkwo writes about the genesis of corruption in Nigeria:

When did corruption in Nigeria begin? In the words of a colonial government report of 1947, “The African’s background and outlook on public morality is very different from the present day Briton. The African in the public service seeks to further his own financial interest.” The colonial report concluded that only public opinion could deal with corruption. The problem was that there was no responsible public opinion to check corruption in Nigeria.1

From as early as 1947, commissions of inquiry were held to investigate cases of corruption. The purpose of the inquiries was to expose wrong -doing and to punish the culprits.

Today, we hear much of the rampant corruption at the local government level. As early as 1955, just seventeen months after the inception of Igbo-Etiti District Council in May 1954, the colonial government held an inquiry into the affairs of the Council. The inquiry judged that the “conduct of the Council’s affairs had become a public scandal.” The colonial officer who conducted the inquiry, FP Cobb, noted, “public indignation was widespread and strong.” 2 The public was outraged at the corrupt behaviour of their representatives.

The report on Igbo-Etiti District Council revealed that there was ‘systematic corruption” in the appointment and promotion of staff and in the awarding of contracts. Bribes of L80 to L100 were demanded for unnecessary appointments. The brother of the Secretary to the District Council was hired above a more qualified applicant. In one case, a man paid a L400 bribe to secure a post and was never refunded his money when he did not get the job.

Contractors routinely paid ten percent of the value of the contract as bribe. The contracts were not awarded to the lowest bidder or to the most experienced or competent persons. At the end of its first seventeen months of existence, the Igbo-Etiti District Council was L6000 in debt. There was great wasting of public money due to “gross dishonesty in handling council affairs.”3

The local government councils have continued to be notorious for corruption. Why do such grassroots organizations attract such widespread graft? The people are often not prepared to undertake public office. They have no training in the procedures and ethics of public service. They have minimal education. There is poor supervision of the affairs 9of the Local Government Councils. The history of corruption in local government councils can show no change for the better.

In 1956, the Foster-Sutton Tribunal investigated the Premier of the Eastern Region, Nnamdi Azikiwe for his involvement in the affairs of African Continental Bank (ACB). Under the code of conduct for ministers, a government officer was required to relinquish his holdings in private business when he assumed public office. The Foster-Sutton Tribunal felt that Zik did not severe his connections to the bank when he became a Minister. The Tribunal believed that Zik continued to use his influence to further the interests of ACB.

Zik, his family, and the Zik Group of Companies were the principal shareholders of the African Continental Bank. ACB loaned over L163, 000 to the Zik Group of Companies at low interest. The Zik group did not have to repay the loans until 1971. ACB was a distressed bank. The new registrar of banks in 1952 refused to grant ACB a license. Attempts to find partners for the bank in Britain failed because of the insolvency of the bank.
In the words of a colonial government official, “Were a UK minister to be involved in a series of transactions the result of which public funds were used to support an otherwise shaky institution in which he was directly interested, he would be forced to leave public life.”4 Why did not the colonial government prosecute Zik for his failure to observe the code of conduct for government officers? The colonial correspondence revealed that the government supported the NCNC as the only party to embrace national unity. Without Zik, the NCNC would collapse. The national interest of the country demanded that Zik continue as leader of the party.5

The Governor of the Eastern Region Sir Clement Pleass further observed, “The exercise of public power for private profit is established in the East.” “The aim of the colonial government was not to establish a standard of honesty in public life. Only time and education can do that.” “A number of sensible people realized that Zik had done harm in the East in the last two years, but the mass of the people, ignorant and uneducated, voted him back to power.”6

When Zik called for a general election in 1957, as an alternative to resigning in the face of the findings of the Foster-Sutton Tribunal, the people gave him their support. The Economist observed that Nigerians had a “sunny and tolerant mentality” towards corruption.7 The colonial officer hoped that “Eventually sufficiently honest and enlightened people will be thrown up to rebuild the prosperity and good government of the region.”8

Obafemi Awolowo, the first premier of the Western Region, was found guilty of corruption by the Coker Commission in 1962. In 1954, the Western Region Marketing Board had L6.2 million. By May 1962, it had to exist on overdrafts amounting to over L2.5 million. A loan of L6.7 million was made to the National Investment and Properties Co., Ltd. for building projects out of which only L500, 000 was ever re-paid. The Western Region Finance Corporation and the West Nigeria Development Corporation also received loans of millions of pounds, which were never re-paid. The Coker Commission found Awolowo responsible for the all the ills of the Western Region Marketing Board, and Awolowo “without a doubt has failed to adhere to the standards of conduct which are required for persons holding such a post.”9

The First Republic, with Zik as the President, was marked by widespread corruption. Government officials looted public funds with impunity. Federal Representative and Minister of Aviation, KO Mbadiwe, flaunted his wealth by building a palace in his hometown. When asked where he had gotten the money to build such a mansion, KO replied, ”From sources known and unknown.” Minister of Finance Chief FS Okotie- Eboh responded to charges of accumulation of wealth by government officers by quoting from the Bible, “To those that have, more shall be given. From those that do not have, shall be taken even the little they have.”10

Azikiwe did not surround himself with men of good character. Chinua Achebe maintained that the political thought of both Awolowo and Azikiwe was based on politics for material gain. Achebe quoted from the autobiographies of the two men to show that making money and living well were primary goals in life for both our nationalist leaders. “If we were a more discerning people, we should not have trusted them with our lives even in the fifties and sixties.”11


The popular acceptance and even admiration for corruption was highlighted in Chinua Achebe’s novel about the politicians of the First Republic, A Man of the People. “The people had become even more cynical than their leaders and were apathetic into the bargain. “Let them eat,’ was the people’s opinion . . . It may be your turn to eat tomorrow.” 12

To be continued.

In Tanzania:

"...The purpose of the Anti Corruption Tracker System (CTS) is to keep track record of publicly available information on presumed or confirmed cases of corruption in order to increase accountability and responsiveness in the fight against corruption..."

Its aims are:

• To building a data bank of cases on presumed and confirmed cases on corruption
• Increasing transparency and accountability of cases
• Increasing citizen engagement in the fight against corruption
• Establishing an electronic quick archive that can be accessed to monitor cases on corruption
• Establishing a mechanism that can used as an instrument to assist state institutions to take action in response against corruption behaviours
• To provide an electronic medium between the state institutions and public on issues related to corruption.

Over the past several weeks, the international community has been speaking out loud and clear against Africa’s poverty in the wake of the G8 summit at the Gleneagles Hotel in Scotland this week. Previously, the Africa Commission set up by the British Prime Mister Tony Blair produced a report on Africa’s poverty, the causes and what to do about it. Many reasons have been advanced for Africa’s poverty, among which are poor governance and corruption by our African governments. Africa’s governments seem to be less worried about the poverty of their people than the G8 governments. The people of the world are holding concerts and demonstrations in their streets to make Africa’s poverty history. What are we ordinary Africans, the victims of bad governance, of government corruption, of poverty, doing in response to this global awakening about our plight? I challenge you to rise up and speak out loud and clear against bad governance, against corruption, against poverty. For it is bad governance and corruption that are the sins that those who are hesitating to write off Africa’s debts, to increase aid, and to practice fair trade, are citing to deny us of the much needed reprieve, to keep us under the bondage of poverty. I challenge the African people, from Nairobi to Darker, and from Cairo to Cape Town, to hold peaceful demonstrations across the continent for good governance, against corruption and against poverty. For, if the people of the North are now demonstrating in their streets to influence the decisions of their G8 governments to seriously address our plight, why then, may I ask, cant we ordinary Africans respond, and demonstrate to influence the decisions of our governments: for good governance, against corruption and against poverty? As we keep mum, we keep dying from poverty! Come on, Africans, stand up to be counted, stand up for your lives! Our African governments are meeting in Libya, and are asking the G8 for fair trade. But they are mum about bad governance, and about corruption, the twin evils they practice with impunity to our graves! Can we ordinary Africans afford to be mum about these? Only at the risk of our lives!

By Adrian Mukhebi

According to the AP, significant amounts of the $410 billion federal spending package that Democrats wrote and Democrat President Obama signed into law is going to help preserve the legacy of the Kennedy's.

This spending bill, passed to 'stimulate the economy' and paid for entirely by future generations, the bill includes $5.8 million for the planning and design of a building to house a new Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate. It is unclear exactly what public functions this building provides, or why it is named after the still living Senator. The funding may also help support an endowment for the institute, and it unclear what the endowment will be spent on.

The bill also includes further corruption and kickbacks to government officials with hard earned taxpayer money- there is $22 million to expand facilities at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library & Museum and $5 million more for a new gateway for the Rose Kennedy Greenway, a park system in downtown Boston. It is unclear why the JFK Library & Museum needs more money, especially more so than other Presidential libraries and museums, and it is unclear why a new gateway must be built now, when times are hard and money is tight, for a park system.

This is what happens when you elect Democrats- Republicans might waste money and big big spenders, Republicans might disappoint you and run up debts too- but Democrats use your money to build temples to themselves and their families, and commit outright corruption.

President Barack Obama signed the bill, describing it as imperfect, and saying that this is going to be an "end to the old way of doing business." The old way of doing business was to use taxpayer money more wisely, or at least try to hide corruption- the new way, the change that everyone voted for, is to openly commit corruption and run up massive debts.

In two years, you personally can make a difference by voting out these corrupt Democrat legislators- two years after that, you will have a chance to get rid of the grand marshal of this corruption parade. Don't forget that.

Via Detroit News:

A federal grand jury has indicted former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, his father Bernard Kilpatrick, former Kilpatrick aide Derrick A. Miller, Kilpatrick pal Bobby Ferguson and former Detroit water chief Victor Mercado, the U.S. Attorney's Office said today.

The 38-count indictment charges them with racketeering conspiracy and accuses them of extortion, bribery and fraud. The indictment alleges Ferguson received "tens of millions of dollars from municipal contracts" after the power of the mayor's office was used to coerce others to steer work his way.

Some of that money was then shared with Kwame Kilpatrick and his father, Bernard, the indictment alleges. Kilpatrick and his dad also are accused of extorting hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash, free flights and other benefits from a variety of contractors. Some of the allegations date back to Kilpatrick's days as a state representative, before he was elected mayor in 2001.

Today's charges are another blow to what was once one of Michigan's most powerful political families. Kwame Kilpatrick was a rising star in the Democratic party, having won the mayor's office after becoming a young leader in the state House. His mother, former U.S. Rep. Carolyn Cheeks-Kilpatrick, was a powerful Detroit congresswoman until she lost a primary this year in the wake of her son's legal difficulties. His father, Bernard Kilpatrick, was a top aide to the late Wayne County Executive Edward H. McNamara.

Let's be quite clear with this- Kwame was a Democrat, his father was a Democrat, and his mother is today STILL a voting member of the Democratic caucus in the House (not a "former" US Rep!). Kwame was a rising star in the Democratic Party, and his aides and friends and supporters extended throughout the Democratic Party. He donated money to Democrats, they donated money to him, and thus his faults and corruption do indeed reflect on the larger Democratic party.

After years of Democrats in Michigan and around the nation ranting about how the Republican Party was a 'culture of corruption', the evidence increasingly piles up that it is mainly Democrats who cultivate a culture of corruption, whether it is in Illinois, New York, or Detroit Michigan. The love of power, the love of control, and the desire to use the power of government to enrich friends and supporters naturally is more corrupting of government officials than those who believe in limited government and conservative values.

According to OpenSecrets.org, Bernard Kilpatrick defrauded taxpayers out of millions of dollars and funneled some of that money to Democratic candidates such as Debbie Stabenow and Barack Obama. Kwame Kilpatrick used corruption and racketeering to enrich himself and also sent some of that tainted money to Democrat candidates such as David Obey and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Bobby Fergusan, also indicted, donated money to Kwame's mother and Bernard's wife, Democrat Carolyn Kilpatrick. Derrek Miller, another indicted Democrat, gave money to Stabenow, Obama, and Kilpatrick. This indeed is a culture of corruption and money-laundering, where Democrat crooks steal from taxpayers to support with campaign cash other Democrats.

This culture of corruption isn't exclusively Democrats- there are Republicans that are corrupt too- but it is increasingly true that those who seek power and influence over others and increasingly calling the Democratic Party home.

The United States has dropped out of the "top 20" in a global league table of least corrupt nations, tarnished by financial scandals and the influence of money in politics, Transparency International said on Tuesday. In response, US President Barack Obama (Democrat) said "My name may not be on the ballot (for the midterm elections on Nov 2), but our agenda for moving forward is."
Obama's agenda for moving forward, which increasing includes questionable lending practices in the subprime crisis, various campaign funding schemes, and rows over political funding, have all rattled public faith about prevailing ethics in America and contributed to the increasing corruption in the US political system, to a level not seen since. "I also think anybody who is concerned about the direction of the country has to understand that this election is just as important as 2008," Obama explained.

Obama is right- this election is about the direction our nation is headed and his agenda- an agenda that favors corruption, crony capitalism, lawless takeovers, taxpayer money flowing to politically connected companies and groups, and increasing state control over larger and larger segments of the economy. Before you go to the polls, before your family members go to the polls, remind them of what they are voting for this election- America is increasingly rated as less free, less prosperous, more corrupt, and it has all been going on under Democratic control of Congress and the Presidency.

Transparency International pointed out that in many states, notably Democratic-run New York and Illinois, iinfluence apparently could be bought and sold, and that was not good. Also it was noted that in the United States, because the Democrats control the Congress, there appears to be almost no oversight of the sprawling and active and unrestricted executive branch, and this also increased the corruption of our political system.

"Essentially, in 2008, we won the ability to start making change, and that's what we've done over the last two years," Obama said. He's right- and it now is up to you to vote whether or not you like these changes by voting for Congress this election.

The Hill and Reuters helped contribute to this post. I could only find Transparency International's report from 2007 to buy (Global Corruption Report 2007: Corruption in Judicial Systems (Transparency International Global Corruption Reports)- it'd be interesting to buy that though and compare it to the one from 2010, after Democrats gained control of Congress and the White House.

Kersty McCourt writing in Pambazuka:

Corruption and excessive pretrial detention are mutually reinforcing: A criminal justice system that overuses pretrial detention is susceptible to corruption, and an environment marked by corruption will likely lead to over-reliance on pretrial detention. Both corruption and excessive pretrial detention flourish under the same circumstances. The two form a vicious cycle: A dysfunctional justice system leads to corruption, and that corruption further twists the justice system.

Continuing:

All over the world, poor people are arrested because they cannot pay a bribe to the corrupt police officer, then denied access to counsel or family because they cannot bribe the corrupt guard or prosecutor, then held indefinitely – or found guilty – because they cannot bribe the corrupt judge. The ability to put cash in the right hands often makes the difference between freedom and detention. Pretrial detention centres are populated almost entirely by poor people.

More here

Henry Ekwuruke reports on a meeting titled "Deepening the Judiciary’s Effectiveness in Combating Corruption". Its attendees:

grappled with the dual complexity faced by the judiciary in curbing corruption and the need for the judiciary to purge itself of corruption within its own ranks. The discussions aimed at proposing practical modalities to enhance the role of the judiciary in combating corruption.

Comments from various speakers ranged from:

"Our anti-corruption efforts are compounded by the difficulty of managing the expectations of the public..."Most cases involve highly complex transactions, spanning many jurisdictions, which brings about a lot of frustrations due to the apparent lack of progress,"Zambian participant.

To:

"In a country that at one point had the reputation of one of the worst countries to do business, we are fighting corruption on many fronts, including introducing anti money-laundering, and public procurement laws...“we must be incorruptible and must be ready to die in the course of duty.”,Nigerian representative.

The aim of Trustlaw is to:

• Spread the culture and practice of pro bono work around the world, connecting those who need legal assistance with lawyers willing to work at no cost
• Offer a one-stop shop for news and information on good governance and anti-corruption issues

via the Corruption Blog

Patrick Smith at the FT reviews Michela Wrong's It’s Our Turn to Eat: The Story of a Kenyan Whistleblower:

These are hard times for anti-corruption campaigners, and harder still in Africa where activists face harassment and sometimes death. According to United Nations and World Bank estimates, corruption and transfer pricing cost Africa more than $150bn a year.Michela Wrong’s compelling book, It’s Our Turn to Eat, charts the career of a doughty opponent of this corruption: Kenyan anti-graft campaigner, John Githongo. By describing Githongo’s efforts, Wrong explains the mechanics of corruption within government and business circles and why so much western development policy in Kenya fails.

Khadija Sharife writes in FPIF:

In Africa, political power is often used as a ‘get out of jail free’ card, immunising the venal political elite through various mechanisms. Transparency International, the global corruption watchdog renowned for its annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), argues that corruption is especially rampant in Africa. TI defines corruption as the ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, a notion limited to the governing bodies in developing countries.
But this is only half the story. A respectable financial army plays an invaluable role in a global shadow economy. A coterie of bankers, accountants, and lawyers – based in ‘transparent’ London, New York, and Singapore – serve as the ‘postcard-island’ tax havens, and they're backed by multilateral financial institutions. Corrupt government leaders get away with graft much more easily and more frequently because of these international financial enablers

More here
Via Pambazuka

Related articles by Zemanta

• Zambian expresident Frederick Chiluba cleared of corruption (telegraph.co.uk)
• The Enrichment of Africa's French Allies (time.com)

Khadija Sharife writes in FPIF:

In Africa, political power is often used as a ‘get out of jail free’ card, immunising the venal political elite through various mechanisms. Transparency International, the global corruption watchdog renowned for its annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), argues that corruption is especially rampant in Africa. TI defines corruption as the ‘abuse of entrusted power for private gain’, a notion limited to the governing bodies in developing countries.
But this is only half the story. A respectable financial army plays an invaluable role in a global shadow economy. A coterie of bankers, accountants, and lawyers – based in ‘transparent’ London, New York, and Singapore – serve as the ‘postcard-island’ tax havens, and they're backed by multilateral financial institutions. Corrupt government leaders get away with graft much more easily and more frequently because of these international financial enablers

More here
Via Pambazuka

Related articles by Zemanta

• Zambian expresident Frederick Chiluba cleared of corruption (telegraph.co.uk)
• The Enrichment of Africa's French Allies (time.com)

In several earlier posts I have been critical of Obamacare because it attacks life, liberty, and property and because it represents the growing tyranny of the federal government. But somehow I missed an important reason why we should oppose giving the national government more control over our healthcare system- power should not be concentrated in the hands of government and government officials because when this happens it increases by considerable amounts the chances that this power will be used in a corrupt manner. And we're seeing that under President Barack Obama (Democrat) and a Congress that was run by Nancy Pelosi (Democrat), legislation like Obamacare was passed into law that is now leading to considerable amounts of corruption in our system.

Corruption takes makes many forms, but in this case, we have to consider whether or not Democrats, led by President Obama and Democrats in Congress, passed legislation that allows and encourages more corruption in our nation and also whether or not these same Democrats continue to be encouraging and supporting of corruption. Corruption is seen usually in several ways- trading in influence, patronage, cronyism, electoral fraud, and kickbacks.

It was my suspicion several months ago that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was a corrupt piece of legislation designed to transfer property and choice from those who have it to those who want it. There would be those who would not want to be part of this process who would then ask for waivers, and it was my suspicion that these waivers would be given out based on political considerations- in other words, they would be given to groups that support the Democratic Party, Obama in particular, or to companies who had access and connections to those Democratic party officials who were making the decisions on the waivers, likely because of their campaign donations. So I started to do some research on the issue- as I stated, the research was by no means an exhaustive list of evidence but did end up being some pretty fair anecdotal evidence that those who are receiving waivers from Obamacare are those who donated large amounts of money to Barack Obama. Check out the post for my little bit of research on this issue. Usually where there is lots of smoke there is a fire, and it turns out the smoke I saw is now being seen by others.

The Daily Caller is reporting that:

Of the 204 new Obamacare waivers President Barack Obama’s administration approved in April, 38 are for fancy eateries, hip nightclubs and decadent hotels in House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s Northern California district. That’s in addition to the 27 new waivers for health care or drug companies and the 31 new union waivers Obama’s Department of Health and Human Services approved.

Pelosi’s district secured almost 20 percent of the latest issuance of waivers nationwide, and the companies that won them didn’t have much in common with companies throughout the rest of the country that have received Obamacare waivers. Other common waiver recipients were labor union chapters, large corporations, financial firms and local governments.

This is not shocking news to me- Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House and Barack Obama is still our President, and both are Democrats, and of course the kick-backs will be going primarily to areas that supported them, whether they be in Pelosi's district or union allies or local government units that vote overwhelmingly Democrat.

I think Mona Charen from RealClearPolitics really understands the nature of Obamacare- it is designed to move us away from a nation built on equality and laws to a nation built on power and men:

....There are rumblings of suspicion that HHS has shown favoritism -- labor unions have received some 26 percent of waivers while comprising only 12 percent of workers. As Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee remarked, "What does it say about the feasibility of the health care law when the administration needs to exempt over 1,000 health plans from its own law?"

A few wags have suggested that the HHS grant the rest of the country a waiver and be done with it. But the implications of what Professor Richard Epstein has called "government by waiver" aren't funny. As Congress has ceded more and more power to regulatory agencies, the opportunities for abuse of power multiply. Writing in National Affairs, Epstein notes that among the companies and entities that successfully sought waivers from Obamacare's provisions were PepsiCo, Foot Locker, the Pew Charitable Trusts, many local chapters of the Teamsters, the United Food and Commercial Workers union, and numerous public-employee unions.

But, asks Epstein, "(W)hat about employers who do not have the resources to navigate the waiver process? What about those lacking the political connections to make their concerns heard in Washington? And what happens when the one-year waivers run out? Will they be renewed? Under what conditions? And what rights will insurers have to waive then in order to avoid going out of business?"

The world of Obamacare is no place for the little guy.

The danger of waiver power is that it will be used differentially, giving one private entity a competitive advantage over another. The company denied a waiver can bring suit -- but litigation is expensive and slow....

....Because there are so few avenues of recourse when we live under a government by waiver, we are forced, as Epstein warns, to trust in the good judgment of bureaucrats and elected officials: "The fate of our rights and liberties is left to the wisdom and discretion of individuals; we are therefore governed by men, not by laws."

In Marbury v. Madison, Justice Marshall wrote: "The government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal right." It will also cease to deserve that "high appellation" if we submit to the unreviewable discretion of agencies.

There really are two visions of the future of America being pushed for by the two parties in our nation- one vision pushes for a nation built on laws (although you might disagree with some of those laws) and another vision pushes for a nation built on the rule of powerful men (although you might agree with some of the rules these men establish). It's a tough choice for many- side with the strongman who promises a better future, or side with the lawman who promises a nation built on law. Many will be seduced, and our nation will be less because of it.

Nuhu Ribadu and others at a 'Symposium on Investigative Reporting on bribery and corruption',  in Bombastic Element:

A high profile panel aptly titled "Corruption Hunters," answered questions about international corruption and the role of the media during the 3rd Annual Logan Symposium on Investigative Reporting back in April.

The FT writes about "The legacy of Suharto":

In the 1990s, World Bank staff used to tell a joke about two friendly government ministers, one from Indonesia, the other from Nigeria. Each enriched himself by taking bribes from a big road contract. The Indonesian took 20 per cent of the contract price, but the Nigerian boasted to his friend that he was even richer because his cut was 100 per cent. But in Nigeria, of course, there was no road.The purported moral of the joke was that Asian corruption was efficient whereas African corruption was not. Former allies and business associates of Suharto, the Indonesian ex-president who died on Sunday, want his legacy to be judged in this light. Suharto may have been corrupt and authoritarian during his 32 years in power, they say, but he oversaw political stability and economic growth that pulled millions of Indonesians out of poverty...It will be easier to end corruption if the crimes of the late Suharto, his relatives and associates are not swept under the carpet in a misguided attempt to burnish his legacy. Suharto was better than some of his African counterparts, but worse than his people deserved.

John Githongo on corruption and the poverty equation:

There's a sense in which corruption is the No. 1 manufacturer of poverty. In particular, it is the No. 1 engine of creating inequalities in developing societies -- which is worse than poverty in and of itself. It's one thing having high levels of poverty, but it's a completely different thing to have stark inequalities caused by corruption and the conspicuous consumption that comes with it. [The latter] leads to political contradictions that can destabilize a nation or at the very least undermine democratic progress.

More here

Reviews of Daniel Jordan Smith's A Culture of Corruption Everyday Deception and Popular Discontent in Nigeria :

The heart of the book concerns how Nigerians cope daily with the need to 'settle' with those who hold power, but are also experiencing a breakdown of the system that at least allowed for survival. -- Nina C. Ayoub Chronicle of Higher Education [Smith's] book offers a sophisticated and deeply troubling portrait of a contemporary Nigeria. -- Nicolas van de Walle Foreign Affairs Smith has written a sharply critical, yet finely judged, book that every student of African politics should pay heed to. -- Ebenezer Obadare International Affairs [Smith's] primary concern is with the perception of corruption amongst Nigerians and the impact this perception has on the behavior of Nigerians. Anyone who is concerned with the discussion of corruption and how it relates to the development of African economies should read Smith's book-Amazon