Reference no: EM132287118
The election of a new US governor brings many changes to the functioning of the state capital, including the rearrangement of a variety of positions. In most cases political appointees have contributed a great deal to the governor’s election bid and have expertise in a specific area related to the appointed post. Joe Barry was in that position when he was made assistant agricultural commissioner in January 2013. He was instrumental in getting the new governor elected especially through his fundraising efforts. Joe’s family owned thousands of acres in the state and had been farming and ranching since the 1940s. Joe earned a bachelor’s degree in agricultural economics & policy and a law degree from one of the state’s top institutions.
He worked as an attorney in the state’s capital city for over eighteen years and represented a range of clients, most of whom were involved in agriculture. Thus he had many characteristics that made him a strong candidate for assistant commissioner. After about six months on the job, Joe had lunch with a couple of friends he had known for many years. During that June lunch, they had a casual conversation about the fact that Joe never had a true “celebration” after being named assistant agricultural commissioner. His friends decided to talk with others about the possibility of holding that celebration in a few months. Before long, eight of Joe’s friends were busy planning to hold a reception in his honour on October 5th .
Two of these friends were currently employed as lobbyists. One represented the beef industry association and the other worked in the cotton industry council. They asked Joe if they could hold the celebration at his lake home in the capital city. Joe talked with the commission’s ethics officer about the party and learned that these types of parties, between close friends, were common for newly appointed and elected officials. The ethics officer told Joe that the reception and location were fine, but only if his lobbyist friends paid for the reception with personal funds. The state ethics rules did not allow a standing government official to take any type of gift, including corporate dollars, that might influence his or her decision making. Joe communicated this information to his friends.
During the next few months, Joe was involved in a number of issues that could potentially help or harm the agriculture-based industries. Various reports and policy statements within the Agricultural Commission were being use to amend state legislation and regulatory proposals. The beef and cotton councils were actively supporting a proposal that could provide tax breaks to farmers and ranchers. Staff opinions in the Agricultural Commission were mixed on the proposal, but Joe was expected to deliver a report to a legislative committee on the commission’s preferences. His presentation was scheduled for October 17th
On October 5th, nearly sixty of Joe’s friends gathered at the catered reception to reminisce and congratulate him on his achievements. Most were good friends and acquaintances, so the mood and conversation were relatively light that evening and by midnight all the guests were gone.
Back at the office the following week, Joe began working on his presentation for the legislative committee. Through a series of economic analyses, long meetings and electronic discussions, he decided to support the tax benefits for farmers and ranchers. News reports carried information from his presentation.
It was not long before some reporters made a “connection” between the reception in Joe’s honour and his stand on the tax breaks for agricultural industries. An investigation quickly followed, including reports that the beef and cotton industry associations had not only been present but also financially supported the reception on October 5th . The small company used to plan and cater the party indicated that cheques from the cotton industry council and beef industry association were used to cover some expenses. A relationship between the “gift” of the reception and Joe’s presentation to the legislative committee would be a breach of his oath of office and state ethics rules
Questions:
1. What are the main ethical issues in this case?
2. What are the main ethical arguments for and against the reception in Joe’s honour?
3. To what extent would the situation be different if Joe was a regular business customer rather than the agricultural commissioner?
4. Justify how you would advise Joe to proceed in the short-term?
5. What should Joe do to deal with this situation in the long-term?