Yes, It’s a Bribe

I’ve been taking a break from posting for the last few weeks. I’d like to get posting again, so I thought I’d start with an easy one.

I spent several years working for a defense contractor, during which time I sometimes had to meet with our points-of-contact in the Department of Defense. We’d usually end up going out to lunch, and one thing I learned pretty quickly is that we weren’t allowed to pay the bill. In the private business world that’s a routine courtesy, but government anti-bribery rules forbid it.

I still work for companies with government customers, and although I don’t normally meet the customers, I still have to take the ethics training, and the anti-bribery rules are pretty clear: I can’t give them, nor can they accept, anything of value to influence official decisions or actions.

So if I wanted to give them, say, a Harry & David Gourmet Charcuterie and Cheese Entertainer’s Crate for $319, that would break the anti-bribery rules.

But what if I made it clear to my point-of-contact that this was a personal gift? That it’s not from me as a representative of one of their contractors to them as a representative of the contracting agency, but simply a modest gift from one meat and cheese lover to another? Would that still violate the anti-bribery rules?

Yes, of course it would, because the investigators in the Inspector General’s office aren’t that stupid. Just because we say it’s not a bribe doesn’t mean it’s not a bribe. The ethical analysis can see through the pro-forma declaration of intent to what is really going on. It’s a bribe.

Okay, but let’s try it the other way around: What if I made it clear that I wasn’t giving the gift to my point-of-contact personally, but that my employer was giving it to the United States Government. And if the government employee with decision authority over what to do with the gift just happens to decide to give it to my point-of-contact, that’s an unrelated internal issue.^[1]Okay, a charcuterie board is an unrealistic example, but it’s not unusual for contractors to try to reward purchasing decision-makers. E.g. If the contract is to renovate a building for agency use, they just might give the decision-maker a really nice office with carpeting, a hardwood desk, and an upgraded executive chair. I’m just sweetening the deal between a corporate entity and a government entity, and my point-of contact just happens to receive a benefit from their agency, not from me. So that’s totally cool, right?

No, of course not. The point-of-contact, who has a duty of honest service to the government, is receiving something of value from me. It’s plainly a gift — and therefore potentially a bribe — and neither of us can launder it by pretending it’s something that it’s not.

So when the government of Qatar gives Donald Trump a luxurious Boeing 747 to fly around in for the rest of his term as President, that’s pretty much a bribe for the same reason. Some people are defending Trump by smugly proclaiming that it wasn’t a personal gift, but that doesn’t get him off the hook. Yes, the Qataris are technically giving the plane to the U.S. Air Force. But Trump still gains the personal benefit of flying around in a far more comfortable plane than he normally would. He’s getting something of value, so it’s still a bribe.

Mind you, a sovereign government giving the U.S. government a jumbo jet is unusual enough that it might not meet the strict legal definition of bribery. The laws are not written for unusual circumstances like this.^[2]A cynic would claim that letting powerful people get away with stuff is exactly what the laws are written for. But that doesn’t make it anything other than what it is. The government of Qatar arranged for Trump to receive a lavish benefit, and they probably aren’t doing that purely out of their personal affection for the man.