Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Stresses to U.S. democracy alarm global corruption watchdog

Threats to the federal system of checks and balances have knocked the United States out of the top 20 "cleanest" countries in the world, the watchdog group Transparency International announced Tuesday.

The not-for-profit, based in Berlin, works to combat governmental corruption around the world. It annually issues a Corruption Perceptions Index, and the new report for 2018 showed more than two-thirds of countries scoring below 50, on its scale where 100 is perfectly clean and zero is comprehensively corrupt.


The United States' scored a 71, a drop of four points in a year. That pushed the country out of the top 20 for the first time since 2011.

"A four-point drop in the CPI score is a red flag and comes at a time when the U.S. is experiencing threats to its system of checks and balances, as well as an erosion of ethical norms at the highest levels of power," the organization said. "If this trend continues, it would indicate a serious corruption problem in a country that has taken a lead on the issue globally — this is a bipartisan issue that requires a bipartisan solution."

Full democracies scored an average of 75 on the corruption index, flawed democracies averaged 49, and autocratic regimes averaged 30, the organization said.

The index is calculated using 13 different data sources that provide perceptions of public-sector corruption from business people and country experts.

Overall, Denmark led the survey as the least corrupt nation (score of 88) followed by New Zealand, Finland, Singapore and Sweden. Somalia was rated the most corrupt (10) followed by Syria, South Sudan, Yemen and North Korea.

Transparency International said the Americas were in a particularly alarming state.

"From President Trump (US) and President Bolsonaro (Brazil) to President Jimmy Morales (Guatemala) and President Maduro (Venezuela), the Americas region is witnessing a rise in some leaders and leadership styles that favor a number of the following tactics, the report said.

It went on to list an "undermining" of a free press "especially when coverage challenges leaders' messaging," increased "voter suppression and disenfranchisement," the rise of "anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT, anti-indigenous and racist language," the increasing use of "public promises for simplistic and 'strong hand' approaches to solving deep-rooted and complex societal problems," the "blunt use of national institutions to weaken the system of checks and balances and increase executive power" and "an increase in conflicts of interest and private influence.'"

Transparency United concluded: "Unfortunately, this new reality, which is also part of a global trend, is transforming the 'way of doing politics' across the region, where authoritarian-style leaders are undermining democratic practices."


Read More

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less