**** Moderator comment ******
This is in response to an earlier posting at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/KnowingNewport/message/407
**** End of Moderator comment ******


There is a difference between moral standards and reasonable standards
for public officials. If an unmarried public official has two
girlfriends-or boyfriends--and they don't know about each other that's
none of my business. If she/he does something illegal it might become my
business. I would not want anyone in city accounting to have a long
record of fraud.
On the other hand if an official is in the process of divorce and has
sex with someone other than the spouse, it is a felony in Rhode
Island-adultery-but few people would question that behavior, even if it
is immoral. As the moderator implies, there are also ethical standards
for public officials. At the State level the owners of Lincoln Park are
being prosecuted for bribing John Harwood. Mr. Harwood, however, has not
taken any illegal bribes. In my opinion, all bribes are unethical, even
if legal. This applies from President of the United States to village
dog-catcher. There is of course a huge grey area here when you ask "what
payment is a bribe?" The federal government has a reasonable set of
rules that could clear up most of it.
The original question was about "holding" officials to high standards.
This implies actual rules prohibiting unethical behavior. This would be
a good idea in principle but would go against our tradition that
government is about giving money to the well-connected. Since the
"well-connected" start at the legislature, it is unlikely to change. We
are lucky to have the most inherently corrupt government in America, so
we should advertise it as a tourist attraction.