Evolution Of Society

Answer 1

United states code, title 18, 201(b)(1) clearly says that any person who directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent to influence any official act is deemed to be bribing a public official. In this case, David Wittig hired lobbyist Richard bornemann with intent to influence the representative in the assembly to repeal a law that has been preventing Wittig to split Westar into two companies. The holding company was running into losses. He wanted to take an exemption under PUHCA1935 that may qualify him to separate himself from the holding company. But the law, H.R 4 recently introduced in house of representatives, would not allow witting to exempt him from inconvenient and undesirable investment company act regulation. Bornemann strategy was to provide Tom Delay, a representative with funds in a legal manner and to influence him and his to repeal the H.R 4 from PUHCA Act. This clearly comes under the bribe- to a public official in United states code, title 18, 201(b)(1). Title 18, 201(b)(2) clearly says any public official directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts or agrees to receive anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for being influenced in the performance of any official act is deemed to be taking bribe. Rep. Delay did not ask for any favor but he did receive and accept the money from Witting and was willing to help Witting out by trying to repeal H.R 4 from the PUHCA act. This clearly demonstrates their involvement in a bribe under United States Code. The judgment needs proofs that could make alleged person/persons guilty but the proofs were not enough to prove their involvement. The money was transferred through legal means and for any one to prove their involvements require irrefutable evidences. Wittig was sentenced for 51 months and was fined $ 1 million. Delay indeed got away because of the support of his seniors and laxity of SOCC that just admonished him and did not look into the matter. SOCC gave him the benefit of doubt and just warned him that even an appearance of being involved in bribery is as dangerous and shameful as being actually involved. I think repealing of any act for some personal gain is a travesty of legislation. REG. Delay has indeed more than one reason to consider himself lucky after the judgment of SOCC.

2.

Washington D.C is famous for Washington office. This is a set up by a corporation and staffed with experts in advocating