Sex. It’s one of the various scandals many politicians are all too familiar with in their political careers. It’s a point where their political profession crashes into their personal lives with sometimes cataclysmic repercussions to their servitude in public service.
But the question is, does it matter? Some politicians when faced with a scandal experience career ending consequences while others come out relatively unscathed. Does it matter what personal choices politicians make in their private lives? Whether these choices are moral or immoral, does it affect their ability to represent their constituents?
The answer is yes. It’s the right of the people to know exactly who is representing them, especially when it is that candidate’s character in question. Politicians are public servants; their occupation is to serve the public’s interest in the best way they know. If the best way they know how to do that is lying, cheating and stealing then the public should definitely take those traits into consideration when they step into the voting booth.
There have been several political scandals in the course of our nation’s history that have raised many eyebrows amongst the electorate. Some of the more recent publicized scandals include adultery, misappropriation of funds and an unprosecuted manslaughter.
In 1969, Senator Edward Kennedy left a party and drove his car off a bridge into the channel near Chappaquiddick Island. Passenger Mary Jo Kopechne drowned. It took Kennedy over nine hours to report the accident and Kopechne’s death.
He later pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received two months of suspended jail time. He was never charged with causing Kopechne’s death. It was later rumored that this scandal was the prominent reason why Kennedy did not campaign for the presidency in the 1972 election. However, he continued to serve as the State Senator for Massachusetts until 2009.
In 1998, a sex scandal within the White House broke out across national television when President Bill Clinton was accused of committing adultery with Monica Lewinsky, an intern at the White House. He denied under oath any sexual relations with Lewinsky, effectively perjuring himself when DNA evidence surfaced proving a sexual relationship had occurred. Clinton was later impeached by the House of Representatives but was never removed from office.
In 2008, the New York Times reported that then New York Governor Eliot Spitzer had dealings with an elite escort service called the Emperors Club VP. Over the course of six months, Spitzer spent $10,000 from a front company on seven liaisons. He resigned from his place as Governor on March 12, 2008 after several state lawmakers threatened to impeach him. Spitzer later ran in the 2013 election for the New York City Comptroller. He lost.
There are those who believe there is a firm line between a politician’s personal life and public life. They would argue that some of the greatest leaders in our history suffered from personal failings, yet they are still remembered as outstanding leaders. Men such as Winston Churchill, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy all had transgressions outside their marriages that did not prevent them from being considered as great leaders.
Those who argue such a position are forgetting that political decisions sometimes rely on a person’s character. Character determines how leaders make tough decisions on behalf of the country. And it’s about how public servants handle situations that call politicians’ character into question.
The three scandals discussed earlier have one thing in common–lies and cover-ups. Should voters let someone they don’t trust represent them? It’s not about imperfect people; no one’s perfect. It’s a matter of trust.
Scandals, even in politicians’ personal lives, provide insight into “the mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual.” That is the definition of character. Many people consider exemplary character in representatives a qualifier for trust. Simply put, character is trust.
Moral character is not only defined by the good choices, but also the management of bad ones. Politicians will never be perfect, and the public knows that, but isn’t the people’s trust better placed in the hands of someone who is able to admit his or her mistakes?
