9 of 23

No

Write now Article Tools

Page 3 of 3

are supposed to serve the public, not themselves, not their pockets, not their interests, not a private company. Further, attorney rules prohibit a lawyer from taking any money when there is even the slightest appearance of impropriety. While in the scenario addressed here, the government donor agency client is not "an individual" per se - still, this is a conflict-of-interest because the candidate when becoming President, must act in the interests of the American people, not in the interest of a government agency (that is like "a client" for whom it must do something in return for the contribution). As we all know, conflicts of interest greatly diminish the likelihood of fairness because one cannot serve two masters, each with conflicting interests. And attorneys it seems, should be doubly aware of this.

No matter what the government agency or entity is that gives funds to a candidate running for office, this is not a good policy. It reeks of undue influence and unfairness to many parties raising many matters involving conflict of interest. It is best that the government stay out of the business of financial contributions to candidates and stay away from backing any political party. Instead it should use its funds from American taxpayers to serve the interests of the nation impartially, for the common welfare of all. That is why and how our American system of government was created, not for personal political gain.

Learn more about this author, Gloria Allen.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2
• 3

Add your voice

Know something about Should the US government help fund election campaigns??
We want to hear your view. Write now!