# Why are elected officials permitted to accept gifts? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 28, 2016, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329 "2016-04-28T12:18:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2016, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/21 "2016-04-28T22:51:10Z")
> [@OP](#): > > Sounds like a majority of the court sees nothing wrong with elected officials accepting gifts, free meals, etc. I think the OP is mis-interpreting his link as well. The question before the court seemed to have to do with whether McDonnell’s actions in return for the gifts were enough to fall under the definition of the federal corruption law. It doesn’t have to do with whether taking gifts in and of itself is wrong or not. In anycase, the VA gov’t passed a law after McDonnell resigned forbidding elected officials from taking more than $100 in gifts, so at least going forward, it’ll be illegal at the VA state level as well. ---
**Author:** ![doreen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/858c86/32.png) [@doreen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doreen)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2016, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/22 "2016-04-29T00:30:40Z")
And specifically, the question seems to be whether what McDonnell did qualifies as “official action”. From [here](http://amylhowe.com/2016/04/27/argument-analysis-a-good-day-for-the-governor/) (which I got to from the link in the OP) > [@](#): > > If the indictment had indicated that the official action in the case was getting the University of Virginia to conduct clinical studies on Anatabloc, she indicated, that might pass muster. The problem, she continued, was that the indictment didn’t do that: instead, it described a lot of smaller pieces of evidence – such as allowing Williams to invite guests to a party at the governor’s mansion – as “official acts.” Dreeben responded that McDonnell had taken “every step short of actually telling UVA to do the studies,” and he explained that the charges provided a “composite window” into what McDonnell was trying to do, even if he didn’t explicitly say so. I am a state employee, and I am prohibited from accepting gifts (to the extent that there are actual ethics opinions allowing us to accept broad-based discounts and reward points). If I accept a gift and do nothing in return, I have committed an ethics violation but no crime. If I accept a gift in return for getting someone onto my supervisor’s calendar, I have committed an ethics violation , but probably not a crime. If I accept a gift in return for making some sort of decision (whether this company should get the contract, whether this inmate should be paroled, whether a potential employee should be hired) I have committed both an ethics violation and also a crime. It’s not about whether it’s right or wrong to accept gifts- it’s about whether accepting the gifts under these circumstances is actually a crime. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2016, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/23 "2016-04-29T00:38:38Z")
Sorry you read my posts other than as intended, **Ravenman**. My thanks, and my acknowledgement of my ignorance were both sincere. Glad to hear Congresspersons are apparently less free to accept gifts than this governor may have been. But if you don’t wish to share your expertise, that’s your choice. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2016, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/24 "2016-04-29T12:34:49Z")
Final thoughts - when I admit my ignorance, I do so to indicate that while I may have an opinion/impression, it is not well-founded on personal experience/knowledge, and that I am open to such info/experience from others. Having said that, though, it doesn’t mean I am going to simply immediately adopt without question whatever I see typed anonymously on-line. Especially in the area of law, where I DO have experience that loopholes, exceptions, and creative definitions abound. I’m somewhat surprised that such an approach would be deemed inappropriate by someone in GD, but that may be, in part, a limitation of this means of communication, and in other part, reflective of my personal limitations. I’m happy to learn from these posts that Congresspersons are apparently more constrained from receiving gifts than I had thought. I think in my youth I had absorbed stories of Congresspersons accepting lavish travel junkets and speaking fees, and I may have conflated the past practice of them privatizing their campaign contributions upon retirement. I remain upset about my need to report under the STOCK Act. My understanding is that Congresspersons, their aides, and lobbyists - the folk the Act was created in response to - were not subject burdened similarly to me. But I may be mistaken in my understanding of the situation, and that is most appropriately the subject of another thread (which I never started, because I doubted anyone else was interested.) The current thread was motivated by reporting of the SCt arguments, and the idea that anyone could even make a red-faced argument that it was acceptable for a government official - in this case a governor - to accept $170k from someone interested in doing business with the state. And, that a number of SCt justices appeared likely to accept such an argument. Glad to hear VA has since forbade that, but it shocks me that such a thing wouldn’t have been forbidden long ago. Sorry I did not frame and contribute to the discussion better. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2016, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/25 "2016-05-06T11:48:45Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > But wasn’t he convicted of a federal crime? Isn’t that why it’s on appeal to the SCOTUS? What federal offence governs allegations that a state governor has been bribed? 😕 He was convicted of four things (Actually, 12 counts, but for four things). The first was honest services fraud. The second was “Obtaining property under cover of official right”. The third was “Conspiracy to obtain property under cover of official right.”, and the fourth was making a false statement on an official filing. Honest services fraud is defined as “defrauding another of the intangible right to honest services.” Courts used to define it more broadly, but in 2010, two Supreme Court cases, Skilling v US (appealing the conviction of the former CEO of Enron), and Black v US, (involving the conviction of Lord Black) pretty much restricted its scope to bribes and kickbacks. Obtaining property under cover of official right was defined under the Hobbs Act, and it’s basically when a public official takes money not due to him in exchange for performing his official duties. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2016, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/26 "2016-05-06T14:10:17Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Yesterday the Supremes heard [oral argument](http://www.scotusblog.com/) on the ex-VA governor’s appeal of his conviction for bribery. The governor and his wife accepted some $170 in gifts/loans from a bsinessman, and in return, set up meetings between the businessman and gov’t officials in the governor’s mansion. Sounds like a majority of the court sees nothing wrong with elected officials accepting gifts, free meals, etc. > > I’ve worked for the feds for 30 years. Every year I have to undergo ethics training, where they stress that I cannot accept anything worth more than $10. Maybe a pen (not that anyone has ever offered me one!) They stress that I need to pick up my own tab at meals. So I’m just trying to get my head around why governors and Congressmen aren’t held to the same standard? > > (Of course, my yearly systems training and warnings about private e-mail made it difficult for me to understand how Hillary could have thought her handling of her official e-mail was appropriate. And I just finished completing my STOCK Act reporting of my investments - requirements that Congress exempted themselves and lobbyists from! :rolleyes:) Are you really surprised? First, there is a big difference between ethics at the federal level and ethics at the state and local level. Second, you are not prohibited form accepting gifts from friends. Presumably you have friends that have given you gifts even if they are also professional acquaintances. Third, its the fucking governor of Virginia. Virginia has a history of very loose ethics rules on the presumption that an honorable Virginian would never compromise their integrity over something like money. IIRC, we recently had a secretary of treasury that repeatedly cheated on his taxes which would be a firing offense for anyone that works in the department of treasury. To paraphrase Leona Helmsley, “they don’t follow rules, only the little people follow rules” ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2016, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/27 "2016-05-06T15:21:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Are you really surprised? Yeah, I really was surprised. There’s another thread around here in another forum where folk are discussing the nuances of the laws involved and the jury instructions. I guess this was really a :smack: incident for me. Sure I receive gifts from friends and family. But in no instance is there any tie to any aspect of my job duties. Even if this guy only arranged for the meeting, without explicitly telling the state officials what he wanted done, it seems odd that we’d need a specific law saying it is inappropriate to accept tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars from someone desiring to do business with your governmental organization. If someone wants to contribute to your campaign, fine. But public officials ought not just get “comped” as tho they were pro athletes. I don’t know that there is an answer, but I recall reading what I considered a sensible article a while back discussing the increasing historical trend towards specificity in lawmaking. Yes, we are living in a more complicated, faster world. But when you pass a several thousand page piece of legislation, it seems as though one of the most obvious effects is to create provisions that the wealthiest and wiliest can attempt to exploit. Applies not only to legislation such as tax codes and financial regulations, but also to political contributions and such. I know it is entirely unworkable, but I wish it were possible to hold someone like this governor accountable under the theory that, “either you knew it was wrong to accept this gift or, if you didn’t, you are too stupid or unethical to be governor.” ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2016, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/28 "2016-05-06T18:08:24Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > So I’m just trying to get my head around why governors and Congressmen aren’t held to the same standard? Members of Congress are held to a similar standard. Their gift limit is (I think) zero on the House side and $50 on the Senate side. Or something like that. Governors are covered by state laws as far as gift limits, or lack thereof in the case of Virginia. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [May 6, 2016, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329/29 "2016-05-06T18:09:59Z")
> [@Dinsdale](#): > > Right. I’m giving you a bunch of money, and expressing my desires. But definitely not lobbying. :dubious: > > Seriously, what is the benefit of registering as a lobbyist? Why not just conduct yourself as a “concerned citizen” who happens to be walking around carrying wads of cash? > > I suspect the definition of “lobbyist” for purposes of congressional gifts (and/or other legislation), may differ from what general folk consider to be - for lack of a better word - insiders with undue influence. You’re still making the same dumb mistake. Lobbying means telling legislators what you want. Donating to them is donating. Some, but not all, lobbyists and lobbying groups make donations. Some do not. Some, but not all, donors lobby. Some do not. They aren’t the same thing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-elected-officials-permitted-to-accept-gifts/753329.md?page=1)