Rationalizing and making habits of unethical behavior

            This week’s blog will focus on what happens to a lot of people after they enter into a public administration or elected position. I also find it intriguing as to why American citizens will knowingly and willfully vote a candidate into office knowing that they have previously committed unethical and sometimes criminal behavior. Most individuals enter into these positions with the best of intentions and wanting to do the right thing. As current headlines show, a New York assemblyman has been charged on a 5 count criminal complaint and arrested for allegedly receiving $4,000,000 in bribes and kickbacks over his career as an assemblyman.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/assembly-speaker-silver-arrested-report-article-1.2087758

            To be fair, I do not believe he started out being unethical. I honestly think it occurred over time. So how does this behavior actually happen? Each person has their own set of ethical ideals, values and beliefs. They all know right from wrong so why do they end up making willful decisions that are unethical? At first I think that the do wrong because they are risk takers and that they want to see just how far they can take it without getting caught. Later, after they find that nobody is truly watching they start rationalizing their actions. They first started betraying their own personal ethics but then they begin betraying the very people that placed them into their current position. They stop caring about what is truly important and about the people they represent. The issues take a back seat and they only care about obtaining the necessary votes to remain in power at the next election. Once an official starts and they make an unethical decision and they do not get caught, they then plot about their next unethical behavior. They continue to take chances and then it begins to become a habit. Habitualization is not only for actions that are deemed to be good, it can also refer to actions done repeatedly that cause negative consequences for others. In my opinion, rationalization leads to habitualization and these tendencies can lead to either positive or negative outcomes. Unfortunately for most citizens, they are the ones on the short end of the stick. So why do people act this way? I think that some people simply act unethically for the sheer thrill of it; that is they get an adrenaline rush. For others it is simply because they are in a position of power and they believe they are entitled to do as they wish and then there are those that make these decisions simply out of greed. 

There are also those individuals that are either installed into high level administration positions or are elected into office knowing that they committed either unethical actions or potentially criminal activity. Let me ask you a question. If a CEO of a large company bilked several states out of millions or billions of dollars and this information came out publicly would you vote for him as a potential candidate for Governor? Well Florida did. As a result of his leadership at Columba HCA, he controlled a company that conducted the largest scale of Medicare fraud in history and as a result the company paid a fine of about $1.7 Billion which happened to be the highest fine to date at the time of the incident. 

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2014/mar/03/florida-democratic-party/rick-scott-rick-scott-oversaw-largest-medicare-fra/

           What I find interesting about this case is that Governor Scott invoked his 5^th amendment rights during the subsequent hearings after the whistle blower brought this issue to light. During his questioning, I could understand invoking your constitutional right once or twice but Governor Scott invoked his right 75 times.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2014/jun/17/florida-democratic-party/rick-scott-took-5th-75-times-democratic-party-ad-s/

           Yes, there was a criminal case also being conducted at the time which determined that Governor Scott use this tactic during the civil hearing but it speaks volumes in my opinion because if he did nothing wrong and had all of his records in order arguably he would have nothing to worry about. Maybe it’s just me but as a CEO of a large corporation, how does he not know what is going on in the company he founded? The news is not all bad, at least for Governor Scott because included in his severance package was $10 million and $300 million in HCA Columbia stock, it must be nice to be able to profit from illegal and unethical behavior and claim ignorance. Is he that inept at what he does or is it something else? I believe that he used unethical practices to get what he wanted. Based on my premise of rationalizing and habitualization, I think Governor Scott exemplifies these two ideals as he has shown that he cares more about money than anything else. In this particular case root is the money of all evil. As a side note, Governor Scott is currently has a lawsuit against him that alleges that he is hiding over $200 million in assets in 9 different blind trusts. Is he playing a shell game and using his position to make money on decisions he makes as Governor?  It seems to me that where there is smoke there is fire. 

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/lawsuit-gov-rick-scott-shields-more-than-200-million-in-assets/2201190

           The question I have is, why did the citizens knowingly vote for a man that was part of the biggest Medicare scandal to date knowing that his company stole millions of dollars? What will he do as the Governor?

           Using these two cases, I wanted to show how a person can change over a period of years to turn the system around to their benefit and then rationalize that unethical behavior in such a manner that lets them think that it is acceptable behavior. These two individuals used their positions to conduct behavior that is deemed to be unethical but in one case the public was aware of the potential of unethical behavior so it will be interesting to see if such behavior occurs during the remainder of his term and what the people will say afterwards knowing that they elected him with the information at hand if it does indeed happen. Is it any wonder why so many people dislike politics? Whatever happened to the people that they are supposed to be looking out for?