Q&A: Corruption versus Populism
Corruption versus Populism
Question
Because of Kahlon’s bizarre term as Minister of Finance and his irresponsible dispersal of money, a question occurred to me. Why is someone who uses public funds to improve his public standing better than someone who uses public funds to give perks to his cousin’s nonprofit? Moreover, isn’t a finance minister who steals a million shekels a year, but aside from that manages the state budget responsibly, preferable to a squeaky-clean finance minister who squanders public money in a foolish way that is disastrous in the medium and long term?
Answer
Someone who uses funds properly improves his public standing because the public is pleased with his performance. Some would say that his role is to carry out the will of the public. Therefore it is hard to set a criterion for improper use of funds in order to improve public standing. True, one can distinguish between the short term and the long term, but as long as the minister does things that are within his authority, there is no way to judge him for it legally. Someone who embezzles for his own benefit does things that are not within his authority. A minister of transportation who takes money from his ministry in order to promote sports is misappropriating funds, because he is doing something outside his authority.