The Deep Roots of US Corruption
And what we can actually do about it
Hosting secret pay-to-play dinners with players in the crypto industry. Accepting a multi-million-dollar luxury jet from Qatar. Leveraging the threat of tariffs to get Vietnamese government approval for a golf course. These and other blatant uses of the presidency for self-enrichment have rightly led many to decry Trump’s new “golden age of corruption” in Washington.
But if we want to do something about corruption, we have to take a step back and recognize that to many Americans, the existing system has been rigged for years. And calling out corruption in the current administration without recognizing the longer-term roots of the problem can sound hypocritical or partisan.
Money in Politics
The biggest challenge is the role of money in politics, which a Pew survey this year found that 72% of respondents ranked as a “very big problem”—ahead of inflation and the cost of health care.
They’re right. The wealthy and powerful have long had more access to Washington than ordinary voters. In 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower sounded the alarm about the “military industrial complex” gaining undue influence, with contractors’ interest in profits overshadowing US national interest. Finance, real estate, energy, health care and more industries have also been major contributors to politicians for decades.
While legal, the huge influence of money in politics results in a systemic form of corruption, as it incentivizes policymakers to use their power for their own or their donors’ private gain, rather than for the public good.
The problem grew more acute following the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling, with an explosion of “dark money” by undisclosed donors supporting both major parties. The 2024 elections saw more than $4.5 billion in outside spending, with a substantial share of it driven by groups that don’t disclose their donors.
Weak Ethics Systems
The US system to regulate public corruption is sorely in need of reform, as spelled out in deep analyses by fellow organizations at CREW, Campaign Legal Center, and the Brennan Center for Law and Justice.
Among other problems:
Federal conflict of interest statutes don’t apply to the president or vice-president, and while the Constitution bars presidents from accepting gifts from foreign states that could influence policymaking, enforcement tools are limited.
The Supreme Court has, over several rulings in the last few decades, dramatically narrowed the definition of bribery (with the Court last year ruling that paying a politician after the fact was just a tip), putting the US out of step with much of the world, and making it much harder to prevent public corruption.
Senior officials in all three branches of government are able to trade in stocks, making it impossible for the public to know whether our leaders are making decisions in the public interest, or for private gain.
As RepresentUs has long pointed out, these systemic problems have contributed to a growing disconnect between Americans and their representatives, and likely fueled increasing cynicism about democracy itself.
That’s not surprising, because a democracy at the service of private interests is by definition not serving the public.
Draining the Swamp?
Trump and his network have capitalized on the growing cynicism and positioned themselves as the outsiders trying to disrupt the system and “drain the swamp.”
But in reality, they have taken the problem to the next level—effectively capturing the state for the benefit of those within their network, and taking apart the systems that did exist to hold corruption in check.
Trump has racked up new conflicts of interest, including with the launch of his crypto coin. Many of his cabinet members have conflicts as well. A study earlier this year found that the Trump Organization was developing 19 real estate deals in foreign countries, from Saudi Arabia to India and Turkey—and, unlike in its first term, the administration refused to commit not to enter into new foreign deals. Nobody in the administration seemed to care about the apparent conflict of interest in Elon Musk cutting agencies that were investigating his companies when he was at the helm of the “Department of Government Efficiency.” And while DOGE cut cancer research, and staffing at Social Security and the Veterans Administration, his companies were awarded millions of dollars in new contracts.
Meanwhile, the administration has dismantled checks on the most extreme forms of corruption—such as independent inspectors general and an independent justice system. That has included targeting whistleblowers from Trump’s first term, as well as attorneys (and their firms) who have played any role in trying to hold his network to account. Attorney General Pam Bondi has gutted the Public Integrity section of the Justice Department, which handled cases of public corruption. And it’s hard to believe that the loyalists now in senior roles at the FBI and DOJ will prioritize investigating corruption within this administration, when anyone who has tried to investigate Trump in the past is facing persecution.
A Path Forward
A number of political leaders and public figures are rightly speaking out.
But to be taken seriously, we all need to move beyond denunciation, to concrete action. That means addressing and preventing not only Trump’s corruption, but also the deeper problems that effectively legalize corruption in many parts of our system of government.
Fortunately, there’s low-hanging fruit that policymakers, regardless of political party, should pursue:
Congressmembers could start by passing the HONEST Act, pending bipartisan legislation banning congressional stock-trading, which creates obvious conflicts of interest. That bill has just moved out of committee.
Federal ethics reforms to regulate conflicts of interest by the president and vice-president are also an obvious need.
Other bills are pending or have been introduced in the past to address various weaknesses in the anti-corruption framework, including some of the loopholes the Supreme Court has created in federal bribery laws.
Congress should reclaim its oversight role, by vigorously serving as a check on the executive, demanding information and conducting investigations about alleged corruption or abuse of power, and standing up for an independent judiciary and law enforcement.
While it is a challenging lift, many initiatives are also trying to limit the role of dark money in elections, whether through lawsuits, constitutional amendment, campaign financing reforms like Seattle’s groundbreaking democracy vouchers program (which is up for a renewal vote on August 5) or simply creating incentives for politicians not to take dark money.
Those who have any power in the system should listen to Americans across political parties: we don’t want corruption, or for the government to be captured by one network or set of interests. We need a government that is truly accountable to all.