by J. Young

Created on: August 20, 2008

While it is true that certain rights that are given to individuals in the United States can be taken away because of criminal activity, the laws that are broken are usually severe. If, for example, a person is convicted of drug sales or possession, that person is no longer able to receive federally-funded financial aid. The reasoning for this is that if a person is convicted on felonious possession charges, they probably shouldn't be on school campuses; can't have someone giving our kiddies drugs, after all-at least, if we can prevent it.

The rights that are revoked from individuals who commit felonies increase in severity in accordance with the severity of the crime. Any person convicted of a felony loses the right to own a gun-and sex offenders lose their rights to any form of anonymity, and limitations are placed against their ability to interact with children. These rules make sense as they pertain to specific types of crime. Conversely, removing the rights of a company to obtain a governmental contract because they have broken any law does not address the severity of the crime. For an individual, this would be like having your ability to vote revoked because you went ten miles-an-hour over the posted limit.

There are penalties for companies which range in severity. A company who spills waste into a river is likely to have a hefty fine imposed against them. While I agree that fines for companies should be higher than they are; it wouldn't, for example, make sense to punish a polluting company with the revocation of their ability to get government contracts. After all, it may have been a small and accidental spill-not necessarily a large and intentional one.

Similarly, a company convicted of an anti-trust violation or a more significant crime can have its corporate charter revoked. Clearly a bad thing if you're a company. This, for an individual, is like being beheaded for a crime. Though I would agree that the CEOs, and possibly the shareholders, of companies should be punished for willful criminal acts or negligence; complete revocation of their ability to gain government grants seems to be an overly-aggressive response.

Furthermore, corporations, like individuals, could probably be charged with crimes, even if they're normally upstanding citizens. If one were to take a close enough look at most of us, they would probably find us all guilty of something: Some recreational drug use, speeding, a little drinking and driving, or some fudged' tax returns. All of us are guilty of something; and this is true of companies too. It is my fear that if companies were out-right excluded from governmental contracts regardless of the severity of the error, it would leave the door wide-open for unscrupulous companies to point fingers at competitors in their bid for governmental contracts.

Learn more about this author, J. Young.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.