(Page 2 of 18) - CORRUPTION: Dare We Compare the United States & China? authored by Johnson, Roberta Ann.

CORRUPTION: Dare We Compare the UNITED STATES & CHINA?

Abstract:

This paper examines the nature and character of corruption and presents a general overview

and comparison of corrupt practices in the United States and China. Neither country is corruption free but
the United States has a substantially lower rate of perceived corruption than China. To understand United
States corrupt practices, the focus is on three areas: (1) bureaucracy, (2) political practices, and (3)
business. Today, the U.S. bureaucracy is generally clean but historically, this has not always been true; in
the second areas of U.S. political practices and in the third area of U.S. business activities, the following is
generally the case: laws, law enforcement, public expectation, and professional standards guide transactions
and control/reduce corruption. In contrast, the Chinese political system is very different and unlike the
United States, their political context does not allow for a neat separation into the three areas of bureaucracy,
political practices, and business activities. In fact, the relevant Chinese activities usually reflect a
blend/confluence of these three categories. To understand Chinese corrupt practices, the paper focuses on
the nature of collusive corruption, the ineffectiveness of corruption control through harsh penalties, the
centrality of law to state stability, and the importance of law enforcement. The paper ends with a discussion
of clean bureaucracy and the conclusion that the United States, however different and however imperfect,
can offer a useful comparison to China.

Key Words:

Alberto Gonzales, campaign finance laws, Chinese corruption, clean bureaucracy,

collusive corruption, corporate scandals, Corruption, Enron, federal contracts, Halliburton, Keating five,
Lianyungang case, lobbyists, loopholes, marketization, money and elections, patronage, political influence,
rent seeking, Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Securities and Exchange Commission, Transparency International,
United States corruption, U.S. Justice Department, Yuanjiang city,.

Introduction

This paper focuses on patterns of political corruption which includes the corrupt acts of
public officials (tanwu and fubai) and economic corruption (jingji fanzui). The paper is
divided into three parts: a brief narrative on the general nature and character of
corruption; an overview of corruption in the United States and how the problem is
addressed there; and a description of Chinese corruption with a reflection on how the
United States experience might relate to China.

I. What Is Corruption?

By definition, it is corrupt for officials to profit personally

from public office. The inappropriate mix of public office and private profit is reflected
in the Chinese definition offered in 1985 by the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme
People’s Procurate. They defined corruption (tanwu and fubai) as “activities by state
personnel who use their positions to [personally] acquire public property…” (Levy 1995:
4). This essential feature of personally profiting from public office is reflected in all the
definitions of corruption offered by international experts (Balogun 2003: 129; Wilson
1968: 55; Stark 1997: 108). In Chinese it is translated as yiquan mou si, using one’s
power or authority for private ends (Kwong 1997: 3).

The inappropriate mix of public and private includes a wide range of activities.