INTRODUCTION
It takes money to run a presidential campaign. To support the election campaigns of other members of your political party. And to gear up for your reelection campaign. And to build your presidential library after you leave office. Although the contributions of the ordinary party faithful are always welcome, the big bucks, the contributions that make a significant difference, come from corporations, trade unions, advocacy groups, and wealthy individuals. In exchange for their contributions, these donors may expect a government job or contract, or some favorable legislation. This kind of horse trading is as old as politics itself, but when the trading crosses the line into the realm of corruption, then we have a scandal.
Perhaps presidential scandals are inevitable. The federal government is so enormous and so complex that no one can monitor the activities of all of its employees. And the government has become so powerful that the opportunities for influence-peddling, payoffs, and old-fashioned graft are probably endless. Add to this a sense of arrogance, entitlement, and invulnerability that seem to come with the job.
Interestingly, it is hard to find a financial scandal involving the president from the administrations of George Washington through that of James Buchanan. It is difficult to pin down exactly why this is the case, but it may have to do with the political and business climate of those days. The federal government was much smaller than it is today, which would have made it more difficult to conceal illegal and unethical activities. Business was virtually unregulated so there was no need to go to Washington to convince some agency to look the other way as a factory dumped untreated chemicals into a river, or underpaid its employees, or sold shoddy goods to consumers. Although nearly all of those early presidents complained of being swarmed by office seekers, there is no record of a president soliciting or receiving a bribe in exchange for giving a political supporter a job.
The Civil War changed all that. The size of the federal government and the military exploded overnight. There were new government jobs, and new opportunities for lucrative government and military contracts. It was early in the war when the first recorded financial scandal took place in the White Houseand it involved First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. After Abraham Lincolns election she had let it be known that she would be active in her husbands administration. Ambitious men took to calling upon Mrs. Lincoln to ask for her help in securing government posts. As a token of their esteem and appreciation, these gentlemen presented Mary Lincoln with giftsone such office seeker gave her diamond jewelry.
In the accounts of presidential financial scandals that follow, readers will find that there are varying degrees of culpability. The presidency of Ulysses S. Grant was torn apart by scandal, but the president himself was incorruptible. It was his associates, his friends, even members of his family who were on the take. Grant had so much faith in the people he considered part of his inner circle, that, in some cases, even when the evidence of their guilt was glaring, he could not bring himself to believe it.
At the opposite end of the spectrum from the nave Grant is Bill Clinton who offered donors a night in the White Houses Lincoln Bedroom in exchange for a contribution of $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee, and the no-bid sweetheart deal the Bush-Cheney Administration awarded to Halliburton to supply food and water to U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and operate mini shopping malls on military bases overseas. And then there is the story of John F. Kennedy, joking after his victory in the West Virginia primary that his father had been happy to funnel large sums of cash to the Kennedy campaign, but he reached his limit when he had spent about $2.5 million. Dont buy another vote, he cabled his son. I wont pay for a landslide.
This book is a collection of stories of fraud, bribery, double-dealing, money laundering, and a host of other illegal activities linked to the Oval Office. That said, I did not want to present any of the presidents associated with these scandalswhether Republican or Democratas monsters or morons. There are reasons why presidents bend the law, tolerate crooked associates, and approve sweetheart deals for supporters; and for me at least it is always much more interesting to explore motivations and examine an individuals character than to demonize him.
We see Abraham Lincoln, for example, responding in various ways to his wife Marys acceptance of bribes from would-be office seekers and obliging merchants, as well as her profligate, budget-busting shopping sprees to redecorate the White House. When a group of New York merchants presented Mary with a handsome carriage and four matching carriage horses, Lincoln accepted the gift/bribe and rode in itpeople in political office expected to receive such tokens. When Mary overspent her redecoration budget by thousands of dollars, friendly members of Congress agreed to cover the additional costs with an appropriations bill. But Lincoln, because these funds were coming out of the taxpayers pockets and because Marys redecoration campaign would appear excessive and frivolous in a time of war, swore that he would not sign the bill. Ultimately, for his wifes sake, he relented, signed the bill, and the shortfall was covered.
Whether it is keeping the price of gold artificially high, accepting bribes from oilmen, or pardoning a fugitive from justice, a presidents actions have long-term consequences. A scandal-prone president may see the voters turn against him and his political party at the polls, or he may find his credibility and prestige affected overseas. All U.S. presidents are concerned about their legacies, how they will be remembered by the U.S. people, and how their administrations will be assessed by historians, and scandal can overwhelm even the most impressive achievements.
Richard Nixons visit to Chairman Maos China was an act of political courage and first-rate statesmanship, but it was overwhelmed by the Watergate scandal that forced the president to resign. At the other end of the spectrum is Ronald Reagan, who as president had no interest in the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and so let it spin wildly out of control and into scandal. An investigation of HUD uncovered flagrant examples of fraud and influence-peddling in twenty-eight HUD programs that involved 94 percent of HUDs budget. Of course, HUD was funded by the taxpayers, who had every right to howl like furies over such waste and hold President Reagan accountable. But the taxpayers didnt do that.