Comments on: UT Ranked Among Most Corrupt

By: tenacity

tenacity — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:33:59 +0000

This is nothing more than a good place to start. Of course the reporters’ assessment is interesting, but it is subjective. Until someone does the work of figuring out an objective criterion for measuring what constitutes corruption, everything else is nothing more than (hopefully educated) conjecture. The quality of your answers depends on the quality of your questions. We can’t just go around convicting people because we want to.

Accusation without evidence is slander; evidence without accusation is cowardice.

If someone does know a good measure of corruption, it would be well to speak up. Otherwise, actual convictions per capita is the best we can do.

By: developutah

developutah — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 01:13:35 +0000

how amazing that our ‘leaders’ are so easily bought. i was reading bastaits essay on the law where he talks about the proper role of government to enforce individuals but has since turned into plunder and look where that plunder takes us into corruption..a very slippery slope.

these are bastiats words
“woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make the laws.”

By: VFWDude

VFWDude — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 04:11:21 +0000

Even though the journalist’s views may be skewed one can embrace their opinions as worthy of note. Ranking 14th shouldn’t be surprising. Based on what I’ve seen since moving here the UT politics are quite suspect. Corruptions charges are everywhere yet convictions are low largely due to politicians protecting one another in this state. Another factor of UT politics is the facade of conservatism while oppressive liberal agendas seem the norm. An interesting state for studying politics yet a challenging one if you embrace liberty and our founding principles.

By: SConrad

SConrad — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 02:09:22 +0000

It may be true that “the more inclusive corruption is in a state, the more those corrupt people will get away with it”; and, this may be reflected in the fact that some states which are perceived as being more corrupt actually have fewer convictions. However, to imply that the latter is proof of the former would seem to imply that perception is an accurate description of reality, which ignores the possibility that the more inclusive corruption is in a state, the more they may be able to deceive people (including reporters) into not seeing it.

By: selfevident1

selfevident1 — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:50:23 +0000

Try again…Don’t let RATIO between perception and conviction fool you…

By: selfevident1

selfevident1 — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:48:52 +0000

Don’t let ration between perception and conviction fool you. It takes an honest core willing to expose corruption and to then to seek the conviction. But the more corrupt government officials are, the more willing they are to allow fellow corrupt officials to get away with their disgusting behavior. A closer analysis of the two lists reveals that 6 of the top 15 perceived remain in the top 15 convicted but that 4 of those perceived, including Utah, #3 New Mexico and #1 Rhode Island, actually show up in the bottom 15 of the convicted list. The remaining 5 come out evenly dispersed in the middle. The point being, the more inclusive corruption is in a state, the more those corrupt people will get away with it.

By: holyshiz26

holyshiz26 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:20:55 +0000

Well, I think there is a point there. Nobody in Illinois want’s to come foreword with any other charges because most of them are just as dirty. Utah tends to prosecute most wrongdoings readily.

By: FCD Administrator

FCD Administrator — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 11:59:30 +0000

Well, if you think about it —-

1. The journalists were not just any journalists, they were state house reporters asked to rate their subjects on a numbered scale. The same scale, (1) clean -to- (7) crooked, was used for all states and obviously it was different journalists in each state doing the ranking.

2. So, if the people paying most attention to these folks are ranking them as highly corrupt (which is the case in Utah, when compared with the nation) and then you point out that Utah is 47th in convictions of gov officials – what could that possibly mean?

To me, the likely scenario is in Utah, we have corrupt officials but few in gov have taken it seriously enough to actually bring these people up on charges.

I’d love to know if you have a better explanation.

Oh, and you are right – Utah is in the top 15, but they are indeed #14 in the survey being cited.

By: metamurph

metamurph — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 01:18:59 +0000

I see 14th not 15th but not that I would take a journalist viewpoint of corruption. From a conviction standpoint it is 47th so is it perception or reality that is most correct?