Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.comment From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Happy days here Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 15:23:03 EST Message-ID: \SE G;COMMENTARY \HD Happy days here again? \SH Ethics edict \BY Suzanne Fields \CR THE WASHINGTON TIMES Not since Moses came down from Mount Sinai have we heard so many Thou Shalt Nots. President-elect Bill Clinton unveiled an ethics code for his transition team that he describes as the toughest set of rules for how to behave ever put forward for a presidential transition. * A transition aide shalt not lobby or appear before agencies for which he has had "substantial responsibility" for six months after inauguration. * A top transition director shalt not lobby anybody for six months. * A transition aide shalt not use information for private gain if the information was obtained during the transition and never made public. * A transition aide shalt not be involved in any specific matters that conflict with his financial interest or those of his business partners or clients. So far so good. Vernon Jordan, the transition chairman, is taking a leave of absence from his Washington law firm and from all his corporate directorships. Critics reprimanded him for sitting on the board of a corporation that manufactures cigarettes. These connections could impair his judgment in choosing the secretary of health and human services or surgeon general, among others. That sounds right. What he does when he returns to his law practice and boards is another matter. Or is it? These new (and old) rules are either noble or naive, either ensuring the public trust, or restricting the appointments of good men and women. "The rules limit the talent pool to the wealthy and the ne'er-do-wells," says one Washington cynic. But Democrats, who have been in exile from the White House for 12 years, have that lean and hungry look, and seem unlikely to let ethical strictures deter them from seeking power. Such strict commandments may even bring back the virtuous notion that public service can be a good unto itself. What if young people begin to look to Washington for ethical models of behavior, instead of merely how to have a hot time on the public nickel? The Reformation can't come too soon. In a two-year survey of 7,000 American students between the ages of 15 and 30, interviewers found that lying, cheating and stealing, like certain crimes, pay. Almost one-fourth of the high school students and one-fifth of the college students agreed with this statement: "It is not unethical to do whatever you have to do to succeed if you don't seriously hurt other people." "It's pretty bad out there," says Ralph Wexler, vice president of the Joseph & Edna Josephson Institute of Ethics in Marina Del Ray, Calif., which conducted the study. "These are the leaders of tomorrow. In the individual case, cheaters do prosper. When you take the longer view, it's very destructive to the whole society." High percentages of these students admit cheating on exams, stealing from relatives, lying to a boss, lying on a resume. They even admit lying to the interviewers on one or two questions. As dismal as these findings are, most students say they continue to look to their parents for moral guidance. There may be a message here for parents, too. Now that the campaign is over, and Murphy Brown is merely another semi-entertaining sitcom character, can't we stop the trivialization of "family values," and freshen up the label for a more serious discussion? Even the Roman Catholic Church is updating its catechism, which now is to include a catalog of contemporary sins, such as driving while drunk, tampering with the office books, falsifying checks, trading fraudulently, spending excessively and cheating on taxes. Of course, lots of the old sins remain. The authors of the new catechism no doubt appreciate the account of Moses who, when he came down from Mount Sinai, told the Hebrews in the desert that he had both good news and bad news. "The good news," he said, "is I finally got Him to cut the list down to 10. The bad news is, adultery's still on it." Some ethical ideas, after all, are set in stone. Suzanne Fields, a columnist for The Washington Times, is nationally syndicated. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM