Ethical Issues In The Federal Government’s Department Of Defense Essay

If at that place could be some(prenominal) subject in the the Statesn g all overnment that the realism has gigantic been admiring, it would always be its forces strength. Besides its technology, graduate(prenominal)school product standards, its capital, transportation and educational facilities, the earthly concern has been face up at America because of its excellence in the field war and battle. It would seem for the rest of the world that Uncle Sams confusen offers a smooth-sailing biography that people of different colors race and tense to come over.The big app bent movement to dig into is this Is America free of corruption and abhorrence? The answer to the question is a big no. In this topic, we forget try to look into the honourable standards of the national giving medication for the purpose of having a benchmark in our military rating of the ethical deviations inside the organization. Specifically, we will try to approximate how the plane section of den ial go through the exploit of procurement and will try to pinpoint where the speck in such dish up is, resulting to fraud and abuse. This penning has included actual courtroom cases where the Department of defence force was involved.Through these processes, we will be able to establish that no matter how decently the policies and laws of the national Government, the respectable America bunghole non control its entire people and take up back them from overriding personal interests and habitual boldness. At the barricade of this paper, the author hopes to have the readers convinced that federal official laws and policies dormantness have flaws and that should be taken into consideration the so iodinest possible in mold for the Ameri give the sack rural argona and the rest of the world restore its fading consider and confidence over the people behind their security. electric chair George Bush during his term, in all probability ensuring the public of their trust t owards the governance, issued a separate order that would serve as signpost for strict compliance of all power now serving the public. Executive Order 12731 of October 17, 1990, entitled Principles of good Conduct for Government Officers and Employees orders each political sympathies activity employee to avoid, thwart and help detect fraud and adhere to ethical standards at all clock times and situations.The front arm of the EO12731 provides catchy ethical principles which pr howevert each employee to hold financial interests that conflict with the conscientious per puzzle outance of employment and engage in financial transactions employ non-public government information or allow the untoward use of such information to further any private interest (section 101-b and c). Subsections of the order also wait each employee to act will full silver dollar in their duties and near importantly they ar non allowed to use public office for private gain.The Federal Governmen t, based on its laws and policies, has been straightforward and clear as to guiding its public servants to the proper, ethical behavior they should display all the time. So why are in that respect still countless cases and accusations that have been polluting the air of the public servants? What is ofttimes frustrating to know is the concomitant that charge in the Department of confession, many employees and management personnel has been proven to be contributing to such corruption.The fact of unethical behavior existing in the Federal government is not just an outside ceremonial occasion but is also creation recognized by those flexing inside the organization. In a nip release issued by the Ethics Resource Center, it saturnine out that 52% of the Federal employees are conscious and are witnesses of at least one typewrite of misbehavior among their colleagues in the previous year. What is more is that totally 30% of federal workers surveyed believe their organizations have well-implemented morals and compliance programs and that only one in 10 tell there is a impregnable ethical culture in their federal workplace (ERC 2008). some one quarter of public sector employees identifies their work environments as conducive to misconduct places where there is strong pressure to compromise standards, where situations invite wrongdoing and/or employees personal values conflict with the values espoused at work (Harned, Patricia cited in Smith, Ralph 2008). In reference to the reports mentioned above, this paper made an impression that there might be some social function inside the Federal government that attracts employees to disregard ethical considerations and to prefer personal interests over public trust. unity thing obvious thing is coin. The Federal government, level off though have limited financial resources, has probably been the more or less liquid source of kickbacks for the bad apples in the set. It is worth noting that the U. S. govern ment is the largest consumer of prime contracts (Lander, Gerald et. al. 2008). Using this unspotted information, we can cl betimes conclude that there is sufficient bills for the bad apples on hand. Moreover, it would be rattling easy for us to extract the fact that the gold is more attracting for those inside the procurement plane sections.As to federal spending, reports say that procurement contracts have been the fastest-growing part of the discretional budget. In fact, procurement spending rose 86%, twice as fast as different discretional spending, which rose 43% between 2000 and 2005. Moreover, such spending composed of 40 cents per dollar of discretionary spending (Ibid). The figures are quite more than enchanting and conducive for the bad apples to abuse the trust and government vested on them by the public. Despite the fact that trust is held as the most important asset of the government, there is one thing that even the most powerful government cannot control greed .It is a human piece that the procurement agencies of the government intentionally or unexpectedly tolerate. The rebellious fact of human greed is even recognized by the Department of Defense. As the spokesman of the Pentagon, Dan Howard has noted, The encyclopedism system is sound but there is no system on the face of this earth that in all obviates the human element greed. And that is why we have policing systems (The mod York Times, June 26, 1988). The trust placed by the public over the Department of Defense continue to fade as more and more cases of fraud files in court have resulted to countless convictions.In Philadelphia alone, the investigation conducted at the Defense Personnel Support Center, resulted in the bill of indictment of 28 individuals and companies on various fraud charges. such procurement transactions involved textile and robe industry which have government contracts on uniforms, tents, boots for the gird forces. Here hence is the chance for us to affect these questions What is the purpose of having ethical standards in the federal government? argon these statements of ethical behaviors for the sake of complying with the SEC requirements?Are the ethical standards unsound or the problem of abuse of power and ethical deviance matters of implementation flaws? Referring specially to the Department of Defense, it is un likely that these educated people came of a sudden of apprehending the ethical theorys. In fact, the subdivisions publication, Armed Forces Comptroller, the author recognizes the fact that their personnel understand the invention of ethics. The author even stressed that most of them are required to attend some form of mandatory ethics training (Benoit, Diana 2006).The Department of Defense has in fact sound which they consider as forming the ethical foundation of the Dept of Defense personnel. For the purpose of evaluation, allow us try to look into these then gist concepts. The author stressed that these core concepts reflect the standards and expectations of military personnel and federal employees throughout the organization (Ibid). The first of the ethical concepts is honesty which they define as being truthful and straightforward, regardless of grade or rank. honestness is regarded by the department as an ethical concept that goes beyond being trustworthy that it encourages its employees to do not only what is legal but also what is right. telling to this, abuse of power and betrayal of trust still include acts or attempts of hiding the truth. If the Department of Defense personnel cl proto(prenominal) understand this concept, there should have been no reason to remain silent on issues that involves witnessing ethical deviance inside the organization. The ethical concept of honesty goes beyond the issues of actual money laundering.It encompasses care accurate temperaments and completing tasks to the extent of ones capacity and ability. This means that coming to the office la te, going out early taking breaks more than the allowable time are forms of cheating and thus are unethical behaviors. Cheating the taxpayers could also mean utilize office supplies for personal activities or lavish expending of such resources. What is frustrating is that this concept is being forgotten by high ranking employees of the department at a considerably higher level of pretense as mentioned above.Simple cheating in record keeping and of utilizing government resources for personal use can be detected and be prevented at the discredit level of organization. However, it would be a different thing to know that cheating is even more unspoiled at the higher level of management who are expected to be the police in the department. In fact, the report released by the U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ) during the monetary year ending September 30, 2005, the United States recouped more than $1. billion dollars in settlements and judgments pursuing allegations of fraud and in the next fiscal year, the government recovered a record total of more than $3. 1 billion in settlements and judgments from cases involving claims of fraud (Lander et. al 2008).Closely connect to the ethics of honesty is the concept of integrity which the denial defines as doing the right thing the first time and every time. In an observation by one of the members of the Special Investigations Unit of the Minnesota Bureau of whitlow Apprehension in St. Paul, Special Agent timothy J. OMalley recognizes the temptations of fraud in their field.OMalley said police officers face greater temptations than they did just a decade or so ago (Bladow, J. 1994). As an agent, he can pinpoint the fact that the department handles explosives and illegal drug cases which obviously involve a vast sum of money. Taking OMalleys exact words, a tremendous amount of outlaw(a) cash fuels this market. Here then lies one uncontrollable factor that we can consider. property is the central thing that enabl es the government to run. It is money that is the main reason why people ofttimes compromise integrity and principles with dollars.Money enables the government to provide services to public. Employees have to be paid with salaries, supplies have to be bought, buildings have to be constructed, communication and transportation facilities have to be purchased and improved. In fact, America will never be the most powerful nation in the world without its money spent in technology, education and basic government facilities. Moreover, America cannot in anyway be consider or shall we say be feared by an early(a)(prenominal) nations if not for its military strength. It is a rare fount that this nation is being challenged by the terrorists during the 911 event.What this paper would like to point out is that even though money is an uncontrollable element in the federal government and particularly in the procurement theatrical of the department of Defense, transaction processes involving m oney are very much controllable. In fact, the DOD has sound policies and mathematical processs expressed in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation add-on (DFARS) and Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI). In brief, these regulations and guidelines were codified and implemented for procedure compliance purposes especially on procurement transactions undergone by the department.In its Section 201. 304, FAR requires the flattery of the USD (AT&L) before including in a department/ billet or component supplement, or any other contracting regulation document such as a policy letter or article book, any policy, procedure, clause, or form that has a important effect beyond the internal operating procedures of the agency or has a significant cost or administrative impact on contractors or offerors (Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI) 2004).Where then lays the procedure flaw- on the approving committee or on t hose who presents the facts of the procurement contracts? The answer does not solely lies on these precepts. The factors that corrupt integrity in the Department of Defense can be traced in the early stage of the hiring process. The applier selection process represents a critical, though sometimes overlooked, component of police ethics programs (Bonczek, S. and D. Menzel 1994). The authors suggest that the agency should thoroughly conduct interviews, mental tests, and extensive background checks (Ibid, p. 4).This would then ensure an applicants compatibility with the departments ethical philosophy. This process can be beneficial in the early identification of red flags in an applicants personality before he gets into the department. Even if not all of the factors contributing to the unethical behavior of an employee can be detected at this stage, there are considerable preventive measures that are being make here that can prevent a fetid tomato mingle with the good ones inside t he basket.The riskier the world becomes, the higher the standards should the department implement in order to maintain, if not to enhance the integrity of the defenders of the American security. As one observer have noted, it is important that high standards in the hiring process be maintained at all times because of the fact that diminished standards or incomplete background checks have resulted in the hiring of gird robbers, burglars, and drug dealers as police officers (D. Holmquist 1993, p. 38). We have to hatch that temptations are everywhere and that is one uncontrollable factor inside the department of defense. Because DOD has got much money to offer especially in the procurement transactions, it clear caters to a tempting environment. However it cannot really be an excuse neither it will justify ones act of corruption. Deviance to ethical standards is a clear betrayal of trust and a suck up in the name of the person, if he even cares equal for it.A recent shoot establi shed that fast-talking, outgoing, assertive, and self-confident risk takers represent the best candidates for undercover work. eon this may come as no surprise, the study also concluded that these personality traits are often the same ones predisposing an officer to corruption and psychological put out (Bladow, p. 12). This suggests that a good apple in the barrel has always the chance of being badly influenced by others. unbending hiring standards are therefore required to be implemented during the hiring process at all levels. jurisprudence managers must view their hiring standards as components of managing for ethics (Wells, S. A. 1993, p. 67). Strict adherence to employee selection is a must although diversity in the law enforcement departments must also be considered in order to foster diverse citizenry. Agencies should not pursue the goal of a diversified men at the expense of one of law enforcements most valued asset- integrity (Travis, M. A. 1994, p. 1717).