Comparing The Seriousness Of The Watergate And Iran Contra Scandal
This paper will address the seriousness of the Watergate and Iran Contra scandals, and discuss which of the two was more detrimental to society in America. Lashley Mills SOCA 334 12/9/14
INTRODUCTION
The Watergate and the Iran Contra scandals perpetuate as trademarks of their respective decades. During Watergate which occurred in the 1970’s, American society witnessed a loss in the confidence of it’s own national government and those who held the responsibility to lead the United States in the right direction. The public was made aware of corruption after a break in at the Democratic National Headquarters, which led to an investigation of those involved …show more content…
But, Iran Contra had the added knowledge of why the government should avoid secrecy and corruption. Watergate provided an example for what the Reagan administration should have done, which is taken advice learned by past mistakes. The fact that shortly after the biggest scandal in government history, another serious altercation took place and was successfully covered up for several years begs the question of the authenticity of information that the federal government provides for American citizens. If not for the hard working special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh, who pursued his investigation through adversity in the press and restriction from Congress, the scandal could have been kept from the public indefinitely. This scandal directly correlates to white collar crime in that it differentiates from street crimes, and provided a stronger definition of the landmark narrative presented in the Watergate case. Watergate set the precedent for the landmark narrative that government officials should not be exempt from justice, and Iran Contra showed yet again that there were improvements to be made concerning communication with the legislative and executive branches, as well as the president and the information that is provided to the public. I understand the importance of some degree of secrecy that is needed to keep defense of the United States, but not blatant abuse of power seen in the Iran Contra. Checks on the executive branch are a necessary burden that, since the signing of the Constitution, have provided American society with a level of trust in the government. Iran Contra set back this trust yet again when all convictions were dropped or those convicted were pardoned. Someone needed to take responsibility for the direct violations of American law to ensure to the citizenry that an event such as this would be
INTRODUCTION
The Watergate and the Iran Contra scandals perpetuate as trademarks of their respective decades. During Watergate which occurred in the 1970’s, American society witnessed a loss in the confidence of it’s own national government and those who held the responsibility to lead the United States in the right direction. The public was made aware of corruption after a break in at the Democratic National Headquarters, which led to an investigation of those involved …show more content…
But, Iran Contra had the added knowledge of why the government should avoid secrecy and corruption. Watergate provided an example for what the Reagan administration should have done, which is taken advice learned by past mistakes. The fact that shortly after the biggest scandal in government history, another serious altercation took place and was successfully covered up for several years begs the question of the authenticity of information that the federal government provides for American citizens. If not for the hard working special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh, who pursued his investigation through adversity in the press and restriction from Congress, the scandal could have been kept from the public indefinitely. This scandal directly correlates to white collar crime in that it differentiates from street crimes, and provided a stronger definition of the landmark narrative presented in the Watergate case. Watergate set the precedent for the landmark narrative that government officials should not be exempt from justice, and Iran Contra showed yet again that there were improvements to be made concerning communication with the legislative and executive branches, as well as the president and the information that is provided to the public. I understand the importance of some degree of secrecy that is needed to keep defense of the United States, but not blatant abuse of power seen in the Iran Contra. Checks on the executive branch are a necessary burden that, since the signing of the Constitution, have provided American society with a level of trust in the government. Iran Contra set back this trust yet again when all convictions were dropped or those convicted were pardoned. Someone needed to take responsibility for the direct violations of American law to ensure to the citizenry that an event such as this would be