I was somewhat taken back, certainly not shocked, a few day ago when I first learned that eleven individuals, dog track owner Milton McGregor among them, were arrested after a federal investigation regarding gambling legislation.
Federal agents arrested, in addition to McGregor, four state senators, three lobbyists and one legislative staffer in addition to the developer of Country Crossings, a gambling establishment, Ronnie Gilley. McGregor is a prominent state dog track owner and operator.
The federal indictments, thirty-nine in all, focused on alleged corruption surrounding efforts to pass what became known as “Sweet Home Alabama” legislation to legalize electronic bingo. Various charges, including bribery, conspiracy and fraud were among these indictments.
This senario begs the question, “What is the difference in a political contribution and corruption?” All candidates seemingly accept political contributions–completely legal—and are allowed to use these so-called contributions to their sole discretion. At exactly what point a contribution becomes a bribe is the question that must be answered. Bribes, of course, are contributions that cause a politician to vote a particular way or to, at least, take action that will assure the probability of a piece of legislation being passed into law or defeated. Never doubt that “legal” contributions do, in fact, create a climate where the receiving politician votes a particular way on a particular bill or series of bills. This fact is certainly not rocket science but is a matter-of-fact way of life in most all politics.
I citizen has a right to an opinion as to the “good” or “bad” of legalized gambling, mostly bingo in Alabama, but bribing a public servant to vote a particular way is beyond the pale—it’s illegal!
As will all arrested individuals, those arrested in this instance are to be assumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainly. Having said this, it does seem unusual that so much smoke for such an extended period of time coming from Alabama’s statehouse seems to indicate a certain amount of fire.
If the accused and arrested are found guilty they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law just as would any ordinary citizen, possibly even more so. Elected officials should maintain a higher standard than the average citizen due to the authority and power that accompanies the position.
“Scared” is an appropriate term that most probably is being spoken, or at least thought, in the minds of many more politicaians in Alabama and other states as well. It’s long been known that morality cannot be legislated but, one thing for sure, the voters should study the candidates for each elected office and vote their convictions. These convictions, it is hoped, will be for transparency in governemnt, voting the will of the people, and good moral decision making—something tht is foreign to Alabama politics.
Making a clean sweep of all incumbents seems to be the order of the day and may not be a bad idea. Certainly, some honest, well-meaning office holders will be caught up in the broad brushing but such is a way of life.
Crime is crime whether it be murder or that considered more subtle while collar and, if convicted, those found guilty to be given time to meditate upon their conduct in government provided housing more commonly known as prison.