Ethics Committee

Ethics Committee

Q1. What is the story about?

The story revolves around an extensive investigation that was undertaken by the office of ethics created a few years ago as a means of responding to the numerous scandals on Capitol Hill that included illegal lobbyist funding of trips for lawmakers. It similarly covers a scandal where ten members of the Congress, as well as 32 other members of staff, attended a secret conference in Baku according to an ethics report that was confidential and obtained by The Washington Post, and the meeting was funded by a state-owned company that covered all their expenses.

Q2. How would ethics apply to this?

Since ethics refer to the set of moral obligations or similar principle that govern the conduct as well as the behavior of an activity, ethics applies in this case as a study conducted asserts that the nonprofit organizations filed false statements with the Congress claiming to have supported the sponsorship of the conference. The results of these statements were forwarded to the House Ethics Committee for further investigation for the possibility of cases of federal law and congressional law violation that tend to limit the influence of foreign governments on the policy of the U.s

Q3. Can any of the ethic approaches in this chapter be used to justify the trips?

The virtue of ethnic approaches is the assumption that there is a sense of ideals to enable a reflection to an institution to be able to reflect on its integrity. The congressional investigators lacked any evidence of the members who attended the trip were aware of the impermissible organizers and sponsors were involved and that their reliance on the sponsors was a sign of good faith. From a statement retrieved by the investigators, the congresswoman had submitted to the ethics committee the available information concerning the sponsorship of the trip and received prior approval by the same committee which was in accordance to the laws and statutes of the statutes. Hence with such evidence, a trial of considering the trip was considered.

What are stop and frisk?

This is an act that’s mostly employed by the police where an individual is stopped briefly to be searched for weapons or similarly illegal items they might be carrying with them. It’s a form of a law that permits an officer of the law to stop a civilian without making any arrests based on a reasonable or reliable suspicion that the individual is about to or has committed an offense.

The New York Police Department said its controversial policy kept the streets safe, but critics claim it’s harassment. What arguments can you think of to counter them?

From research comparing the crime rate to the rate of stop-and-frisk, form the data retrieved from the FBI, despite the short up stick in the last two years, it is evident that there is a steep drop in the crime rates with every increase in the frisking process. Since the policy was initially proposed to eliminate illegal firearms related to high gun crimes and the rampant inflation in drug peddling it can be associated with the safer streets that every citizen currently enjoys.

Are stop and frisk harassment?

A report obtained by The New York Post asserts that a federal judge deemed the policy of stop and frisk an act of discrimination, unconstitutional and invasion of an individual’s privacy. Besides, the officers of the lave gone overboard and harass citizens in the name of stop and frisk using unreliable and unreasonable reasons, hence it’s a form of harassment.