Would you risk your family? Your reputation? If you were a politician, would you risk your family, your reputation, your political career? NY Gov. Eliot Spitzer has been linked to prostitution ring (MPR):
"Gov. Eliot Spitzer, the crusading politician who built his career on rooting out corruption, apologized Monday after allegations surfaced that he paid thousands of dollars for a high-end call girl."
While the law lays out one side of the story. Republicans have called for his resignation, and Democratic Lt. Gov. David Paterson may have to step up to the office. But there's also Spitzer's family to consider. Bob Collins shares photos that tell the story (News Cut) and I found myself looking at them, wondering – yet again – why politicans risk it all. There are risks that may result in rewards, and then there are risks that can only result in destruction upon discovery.
Several years ago This American Life broadcast a show about monogamy in which guest Northwestern University scholar Laura Kipnis, author of an article in Critical Inquiry makes the case that many people are simply unhappy and pursue affairs. But she made another point that applies to this situation and has stuck with me all these years:
"…I think that's what's so interesting about politician adultery is that… everybody's very morally punitive about it, or you know, that's kind of the usual way of talking about it, but nobody really talks about well why are these guys risking their careers and having these affairs. And you know these guys who are supposed to be so street-wise and savvy and canny in every way putting everything on the line…"
Open discussion: Why? Why do they put everything on the line? Would you?
________________
Julia Schrenkler
Interactive Producer
Minnesota Public Radio
American Public Media
Objects in Mirror
More:
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 65
It's my opinion that Spitzer should resign. That's all I have to say about that.
But as to the question of risk, I must admit being rather dumbfounded. So many politicians (and others) engage in this sort of behavior. What leads them to it? Perhaps it's the temptation offered by the idea of power behind their political positions - just as accepting money from lobbyists or dirty campaign funds might be.
We all know that noone is perfect and men (people) have affairs. Yet, the hypocrisy of a public official - especially one who specifically champions ethics - seems unacceptable.
(This arose as a quotation by John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902). The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887.)
His wasn't one digression, but a series of them. For one, I would hope he would stay in office - a better humbler person for the exposure. For many, it shows the typical lack of perception most powerful men develop. The rarely heard last part of Lord Acton's quote:
"Great men are almost always bad men."
seems sadly to be true.
The latest conjecture is that he will broker his resignation for no prosecution. If so, we can charge him for prostitution also.
Why jump out of a pefectly good airplane? Why bungee jump off a bridge? Why base-dive from a skyscraper?
The answer is obvious. The thrill of risk provides more of a kick than sex.
As a voter and a taxpayer, I would care more about millions of dollars of government money being mis-shuffled, or multi-million dollar no-bid contracts being awarded, or if Spitzer had been bought by private concerns to manipulate the laws or courts, or if Spitzer had been coldly apathetic towards the public he is supposed to represent and champion.
What type of sexual activity politicians engage in is not my concern, so long as it does not involve children, animals or co-workers who feel pressured into it. Prostitution, like abortion, should long ago have been legalized in this country so that it could be regulated for the public health concerns involved and to keep it from being solely managed by underground and criminal elements.
It is illegal, and any person (especially politicians) end up with a huge public disaster on their hands if they are caught in this activity. So, why do people put everything on the line to engage in this type of behavior? I can only guess that it has something to do with escape from pressure, for an occurrence of personal private pleasure.
They do it for the same reason that some folks feel a need to sneak out of work early and not let their spouse know about it, so that they can go off and have drinks, or golf a quick nine, or walk alone through a park, or play computer games before heading home to their other set of constantly demanding responsibilities.
They do it, because they need something to rejuvenate and re-energize them in some very personal way. They do it because everybody needs some type of activity that is solely self oriented and solely self satisfying. This need can be very strong among those whose lives are dominated by the goal of meeting the needs of others and those who are all caught up in taking care of others. Sooner or later, those people need to feel that they themselves are taken care of by others; even if it is only for just a few minutes, even if it costs a hundred dollars per hour, even if it costs them everything.
I thought it would be poignant to point out that "The Destruction" in this case comes not primarily from moral outrage over the perceived infidelity, but more from the fact that the act(s) were illegal. If Eliot had flown to France, Germany, England, Mexico, Philippines, Brazil, (countries; ad infinitum) to indulge himself, this would be much less of a political issue and probably wouldn't have made national news.
The impressions I have of Spitzer, (created but from scant memories of news items vaguely remembered, and the current discussions being listened to), are that he doggedly pursued white collar corruption and influence while holding office. The majority of the heat he is gathering seems to come from the fact that he has been a champion against corruption. Everybody now clamoring about the dent in his armor; the discovered stain on his cloak of purity.
To me, it sounds like the best points of his reputation were gained by being incredibly passionate about certain things; which would indicate that he is probably an incredibly passionate person.
...and passionate is, as passionate does.
We do not know, (nor is it really any of our business), what happens within a person's private relationships. Show me an American who would want their sex lives placed under the macro-scope of public attention. (You did what?)
Americans may enjoy the scandal of a highly placed public figure getting caught with their pants down, (it reminds us and them that they are human, not perfect, one of us) but we'd only want them fired if the act undermined or interfered with job performance.
I think a lot of men just have a problem keeping their pants zipped and some of these men happen to be politicians.
Yes, I believe that is true.
If Spitzer had flown to Amsterdam and had sex with a 22 year old Ukrainian who had been forced into prostitution by the Russian mob and in addition to her continued sexual humiliation, suffered nightly beatings to keep her "disciplined", I doubt whether many high-thinking American Progressive-Liberals would give to damn.
Prositution is not a "victimless" crime. Legal prostitution, and the pornography industry for that matter, are not, and never has been a "victimless businesses". These are only businesses where it is easy to ignore the victims.
It is precisely this kind of wooly-headed thinking that leads to the glaring contradictions of a character like Eliot Spitzer.
At its core, politics is about character. How can we trust people like Spitzer, or Clinton who cannot control themselves?
What is going to sink his "ship" is the fact that the investigation was not focused on prostitution but on money laundering. What is still unclear to the public is whether this money that was moved from account to account to account was Governor Spitzer's personal funds or that of the tax-payers of the State of New York.
This morning's New York Times article states the following:
"There, in the Hauppauge offices of the Internal Revenue Service, investigators conducting a routine examination of suspicious financial transactions reported to them by banks found several unusual movements of cash involving the governor of New York, several officials said.
The investigators working out of the three-story office building, which faces Veterans Highway, typically review such reports, the officials said. But this was not typical: transactions by a governor who appeared to be trying to conceal the source, destination or purpose of the movement of thousands of dollars in cash, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The money ended up in the bank accounts of what appeared to be shell companies, corporations that essentially had no real business.
The transactions, officials said, suggested possible financial crimes — maybe bribery, political corruption, or something inappropriate involving campaign finance. Prostitution, they said, was the furthest thing from the minds of the investigators.
Soon, the I.R.S. agents, from the agency's Criminal Investigation Division, were working with F.B.I. agents and federal prosecutors from Manhattan who specialize in political corruption."
I have always held the highest esteem for Eliot Spitzer but this just sends chills up and down my spine...This is what is wrong with our current political sturcture today - too much power being willfully given to so few. - The temptations are simply just too great for most to refrain from...that being money, sex, power, prestige and/or access.
I feel for Governor Spitzer's wif and three children.
There has to be more to it though. This exclusive club invite had to come from a person with connections, or IOU's, and I can't help but think less than legal deals etc. He didn't look them up in the phonebook, or just walk to the corner for this stuff, and the FBI needs to keep digging. I wouldn't be surprised there are some others nervous right now about the possibility of plea deals with Spitzer and the law if he talks.
He should resign.
Others have stated that he has broken up prostitution rings in the past.
Greg Schiller - Don't be silly. Spitzer could have easily met your scenario by engaging in the brands available right here in our own country. Such things abound here primarily because of the shroud of illegality.
But you did not mention at all the opposite situations that have also always existed with this "industry." Namely, that some adults who grew-up in destitute and abusive situations were able to leave those situations and better themselves thanks to sex industries. In Europe (and secretly in America), a number of young people pay their way through college via sex industry incomes.
And, of course, some people actually enjoy making money that way.
Thing is, whether legal or not, the worst case scenarios always exist. BUT, when prostitution is legalized and strictly regulated, the worst case scenarios become the least frequently occurring scenarios. Whereas when illegal and unregulated, abusive situations are the most common. Let's also mention that illegal and unregulated prostitution also increases the risk of STDs, unwanted pregnancies, abused and abandoned children and even abortions.
When prostitution occurs between two consenting adults, it is a victimless crime; and one where "precautions" are most often taken.
What you described was human enslavement.
When we elect these men we are not electing saints.
But they get viscious when they sense blood it the water. They like controversy.
The alternative media will not let this one go.
At first I thought it was the "thrill of the kill", "the playing of the game", the excitement that turns these guys on. But this guy was PAYING FOR IT! It's not like he's out hunting for it.
I feel sorry for the wife.
I don't expect a statement from the Nation Organization for (liberal) Women. They were deafly silent during the Clinton deal.
Mary Ann,
We may not be electing saints, but supposedly we are electing people who are capable of letting reason overcome emotion and other urges. Occassionally giving into to sexual urges may understood and forgiven, but when accompanied by hypocrisy that is another matter.
Seems Mr. Spitzer has sacrificed himself to the mistaken puritanical concept that prostitution and the regulation thereof, is a concern of the state. He deserves his fate.
We should never be surprised, however. Time and time again, the most sanctimonious, cruel, homophobic, family-values crusaders are the ones caught with the pants down in the lavatory of some airport or soliciting drugs from a gay prostitute. There seems to be a direct correlation.
...and that's the kicker...
"We should never be surprised, however."
...and that's the reality...
Kudos for having the courage to admit you know what you can legally get for $700 in rural Nevada, but even that is is outrageous in my opinion unless you have some very peculiar needs to be fulfilled.
Because as we have seen, none of the ones preaching that line can either, these two just got caught. The moral majority has taken hit after hit lately, now haven't they? At least they aren't hypocrites or anything.
Federal prosecutors might charge New York's Democratic governor, Eliot Spitzer, under a relatively obscure — and controversial — 1910 law that was originally intended to combat forced prostitution and "debauchery." Its official name is the White Slave Traffic Act, but it's better known as the Mann Act, named after its author, Rep. James R. Mann (R-IL).
I remember Roxy well. She had the best burger joint in Berdo. Had girls in short candy stripe skirts on roller skates that served as the car hops.
Then the Mann act. She was convected transporting girls to Vegas for the purposes of prostitution in the fifties.
This is a federal law created by congress just for this purpose. Write your congressman if you want it changed.
And second, these prices are outrageous, in rural Nevada $700 can do just about anything.
So I've been told (actually, I know).
There's no mention of age.
18 USCS @ 2421 (1994) @ 2421.
*** THIS SECTION IS CURRENT THROUGH P.L. 103-321, APPROVED
8/26/94 ***
TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE PART I. CRIMES
CHAPTER 117. TRANSPORTATION FOR ILLEGAL SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND
RELATED CRIMES @ 2421.
Transportation generally
Whoever knowingly transports any individual in interstate or
foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United
States, with intent that such individual engage in prostitution,
or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged
with a criminal offense, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both
HISTORY; ANCILLARY LAWS AND DIRECTIVES PRIOR LAW AND REVISION:
1948 Act
This section is based on Act June 25, 1910, ch 395, @@ 1, 2,
5, 8, 36 Stat. 825--827 (former 18 U.S.C. @@ 397, 398, 401, and
404).
AMENDMENTS: 1949. Act May 24, 1949, substituted "induce" for
"induct" in the second paragraph.
1986. Act Nov. 7, 1986, substituted this section for one
which read: "Whoever knowingly transports in interstate or
foreign commerce, or in the District of Columbia or in any
Territory or Possession of the United States, any woman or girl
for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other
any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery,
or for any other immoral purpose, or with the intent and purpose
to induce, entice, or compel such woman or girl to become a
prostitute or to give herself up to debauchery, or to engage in
any other immoral practice; or "Whoever knowingly procures or
obtains any ticket or tickets, or any form of transportation or
evidence of the right thereto, to be used by any woman or girl
in interstate or foreign commerce, or in the District of Columbia
or any Territory or Possession of the United States, in going to
any place for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for
any other immoral purpose, or with the intent or purpose on the
part of such person to induce, entice, or compel her to giveherself up to the practice of prostitution, or to give herself up
todebauchery, or any other immoral practice, whereby any such
woman or girl shall be transported in interstate or foreign
commerce, or in the District of Columbia or any Territory or
Possession of the United States-- "Shall be fined not more
than $ 5,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.".
And yet again, I will boldly state that Winston is a conservative Republican.
How can I possibly make this statement with little or no knowledge of this man?
Hmmm..
Could it be the obvious ridiculous blatant generalization aimed squarely at an opponent.
I am not even sure so I am going to go to Winston's site and read through some of his blogs and I will be right back.
Don't go anywhere folks
What do you think I found?
Here is a sampling of Winston's gems:
ON HILLARY CLINTON
"how do you Dems think about the Clintons manipulating the system?"
ON AL FRANKEN
"I thought rich liberals liked to pay taxes!
Just think if a Republican did this? The media would be up in arms over this!"
ON MICHAEL MOORE
"But then, maybe he just doesn't "matter" anymore. Kinda like Cindy Sheehan.
Kinda hard not to call him a "commie" or a "socialist" now?"
Keep em' coming Winston!!
Then people have been discussing his overwhelming pride.
He could do no wrong... never be caught... that sort of thing.
I've made mistakes also, but not anywhere near to this extent.
"Conservative Republican", conservative always, Republican much of the time.
From what I here, there will many Republicans and Independants registering to vote as Democrats in time for the Pennsyvania primary and voting for Hillary!...
WOOOOOO HHHAAAAAA !
He threw everything he had onto the roulette table, spun the wheel....and lost. Everything.
Clinton on the other hand had an affair with a consenting adult. He didn't have to pay for it. While the religious right and others who get morally outraged, almost brought him down, the majority of us could see ourselves in Clinton, a guy who was never morally self-righteous.
Spitzer on the other hand actually broke the law. He also seems to suffer from a huge ego. Power went to his head. What he did was not driven by emotions, or even a sex drive. It had to do with money and power.
I'm not sure where that update will take this conversation, but this discussion has some of the most interesting comments and perspectives I've read about this story.
As far as Spitzer ... I just do not know. When these kind of scandals happen we push all the projections off onto the scandalee, when who of us knows how far this kind of thing goes?
Does seeing an expensive prostitute make him less competent to govern ... what is it about this story. Who are clients 1-8, 10-? and how much are they paying someone to stay out of the public limelight?
The difference between his private behaviors in our society. Do not be surprised if some type of defense, excuse or explanation involving some type of emotional or mental issueis put forward to explain these contradictory behaviors. Perhaps he will claim that he is obsessive/compulsive or a "sex addict".
Spitzer isn't the first politician to be caught up in a major scandal, and he certainly isn't the last. The American people are a fairly forgiving group. If he shows sincere sincerity for his actions, we'll easily forgive and forget. Just look at Bill Clinton. He flat out lied to the American people, but we couldn't resist his charming ways. He's a "real person" to so many of us and is now an icon, sex scandal and all.
Besides that, we live in a sex obsessed culture. Many try to pretend to be shocked by these sort of things, but really...there are a lot more people out there taking part in them than we realize.
Julia, as to risking all. Some people are predisposed to take risks and others are not. I also think that as one becomes more successful, one starts to feel outside of the reach of law and consequences.
And Richard Frisbee's comment: Lord Acton's quote:
"Great men are almost always bad men." seems sadly to be true might be accurate, but I offer Jimmy Carter as the exception.
Good questions, all of them.
I can't wait to see how Liberals/Lefties somehow blame this on Karl Rove. I'm sure he's the one who gave Spitzer the phone number of The Emperor Club.....lol.
I want to hear and see an interview from the prostitute who rates 7 stars on that site.
I can understand wanting to see what the woman looked like, but wanting to see what she did to earn $5,000 seem a bit voyeuristic to me.
Nothing personal, and you may not meant see literally with regard to the act itself, but I could not resist.
Not only did he spend $5,000 on sex, but he apparently did
this semi-regularly.
Now since she has made the news we do know what she
looks like. She has a nice body and a kind of plain face.
I'm wondering why she is not in jail.
So who are all the other consumers from this service?
All the other clients besides 9?
To me this says nothing about Clinton and Lewinsky either.
Also, the trail that this got out by seems fishy to me.
If I had to guess at the kernel of this story, it runs deeps, as
to the difference between men and women, and society, and
how we use sex to control people and lobotomize our society.
What would a society that does not do this look lilke? Would
women be relegated to certain roles, more or less. Would
prostitution exist. Maybe it is time to take a clear look at
real people and let's see what they want and how we can all
get that while protecting people's rights and security.
It's unlikely Rove gave him any information, since it was a heterosexual service. As for her being worth five thou a pop, he didn't pay five thou for the sex, he paid five thou for her discretion. Didn't work out so well.
Well, I saw a pic of her on CNN.............and she's HOT!
Not $4000 per hour worth of hot, but pretty smokin' nonetheless. LOL
"Burt, It's unlikely Rove gave him any information"
True, but when has that stopped the Radical Left from smearing anyone they didn't like? I read a little of the "blame Rove" nonsense from the Daily Kos bloggers..........but none from the actual article writers. I'm sure it will take a few days for them to catch up....lol.
When the money laundering thing was proven not true, the investigation should have stopped.
Spitzer is "low hanging fruit".
The authorities always go after that first.
Besides, what if Client #8 is just the CEO of Uncle Bob's Chili Shack in Omaha? Would you really care?
I agree, authorities should actively go after all the clients on the list, and I'm sure they will. But that's not what I asked you.
I asked if you'd care............the implied question was more like "would you have cared as much?"
Spitzer (if he hadn't resigned) should have been forced to resign because he was a pledged law enforcement officer (as Governor AND as Attorney General), who swore to uphold the laws on NY state. He definitely wasn't doing that.
You won't see Clients #1-8 & #10 to infinity, being made public. Most likely, they're just private citizens. If there is another Governor or Senator on it, expect a new round of media frenzy over it.
The most pathetic part about this whole sordid story is that this bimbo who boinked the Governor is now able to make a buck off it. That's the stupidest part.
Wanna talk about fairness? The authorities should have her in the county lockup already. Not posing for Hustler or "Juggs" magazine.....lol.