Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism.
The Dartmouth
May 2, 2024 | Latest Issue
The Dartmouth

Man of the People

Throughout his career, Bill Clinton has championed himself as the politician who gives a voice to the underrepresented little guy. Ever the consummate politician, he was able to label the Republican party as the darlings of big business. Then in a complete turn around, Clinton pardoned corporate fat cat Marc Rich, who fled the country without paying $48 million in taxes. Apparently big businessmen are okay if their wives hold high society fundraisers for the DNC in their Manhattan penthouses.

At the request of the Democrats, President Ford came before Congress to explain his pardons. It is only fair and proper that Clinton do the same. What bothers me is the hypocrisy of the entire pardon situation. A corporate billionaire violates the rules that you and I have to follow, egregiously breaks the law, and flees the country. He makes donations to the president's causes abroad while his wife raises money domestically, and the president pardons him on his way out of town. If a Republican president had been done the same thing, the Democrats would scream bloody murder. But Clinton, the man of the people, can do this and its no big deal.

Clinton has incredible bravado, and it constantly amazes me that he is able to win over the American people with his charm and make them ignore all his wrongdoings. Think about Joe Average who squeaks out a moderate life through hard work on his small farm. Imagine Joe Average's farm is not doing too well, and he decides that he needs some extra cash for his sick mother. He gets a little creative with his tax returns. Perhaps he claims some extra deductions or fudges a few figures. Do you know where Joe Average would be if he did not pay his taxes? The same place Marc Rich should be --- prison. Unfortunately for Joe Average, he can't afford to take the money and run to live the good life (with his sick mother) in Switzerland for over a decade. To make matters worse because of the estate tax (which Clinton supports), if Joe Average leaves his farm to his kids, they are going to have to pay taxes on it again. Bottom line: Marc Rich pays no taxes and goes free while Joe Average gets taxed again and again.

Democrats believe that taxes play a pivotal role in improving the quality of life in the United States. They support funding for all sorts of major government programs. We can all argue about what the size of government should be, that is part of the great debate in American politics. But when Mr. Rich did not pay his taxes, he effectively stole money from these programs. Imagine what a struggling school district could do with $48 million dollars. Imagine what thousands of military families on food stamps could do with a chunk of that money. Imagine what your family could do if they didn't have to pay taxes this year.

On February 18th, Mr. Clinton wrote a letter to the New York Times explaining his reasons for the pardons. The first section spoke about the legal precedents for pardons. In the next section he gave some statistics about the use of the pardons in the past. He gives good examples of how some people, like first time non-violent drug offenders, can sometimes be punished unfairly due to strict interpretations of the law and therefore are helped through the pardon system. I couldn't agree more. Finally, Clinton tries to explain his reasons for pardoning Marc Rich and his partner Pincus Green. He gives an eight step justification for why he pardoned the men. He cites experts, and goes on to argue that other companies who had behaved the same way were not punished in the same manner. These seem credible enough, right until you get to reason number eight. "Finally, and importantly, many present and former high-ranking Israeli officials of both major political parties and leaders of Jewish communities in America and Europe urged the pardon of Mr. Rich because of his contributions and services to Israeli charitable causes"

While there is wide latitude as to the use of presidential pardons, the one main rule is that there can be no quid pro quo. I am glad Rich donated money to Israeli charities, but I question the motives, and they should be investigated. Since Rich could not give money to Clinton directly, he gave money to Clinton's foreign political allies, who in turn phoned in a favor. This is an example of the spoils system at its finest, and Mr. Clinton has the audacity to enumerate it in a rationalization for an already questionable pardon. Even Jimmy Carter criticized Clinton's action: "I don't think there is any doubt that some of the factors in his pardon were attributable to [Rich's] large gifts. In my opinion, that was disgraceful."

President Bush in many ways has his hands tied on the matter. If he says nothing, then he is in some way condoning the action. If he demands that Clinton testify, then Clinton will turn around and lambaste him for being playing partisan politics. Clinton is a masterful politician because he has learned to play the spin game so well that he is rubber and the Republicans are glue. In 1992 election he blamed the infidelity stories of Paula Jones and Gennifer Flowers that nearly crippled his campaign on the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy." Travel-gate, Whitewater, and Monica" they were all just the creations of the "Right Wing Conspiracy." The more dirt that was dug up, the more popular Clinton becomes. Bush is playing this as well as he can, taking the high road and emphasizing the need to move on, while probably hoping that whisper campaign will keep the issue alive.

The scandals keep piling up beyond the Rich pardon. Last week, the Clintons admitted that Hugh Rodham, Hillary's brother, received $400,000 in legal fees for representing millionaire Glenn Braswell and convicted drug dealer Carlos Vignali. These two men had their sentences commuted by President Clinton. Not surprisingly, the Clintons denied any knowledge. Having the brother-in-law of the President represent clients seeking pardons may not be illegal, but it without question unethical.

There is no such thing as a free lunch in politics. A politician will not get anywhere if he can't raise money. Clinton, with the help of the new DNC chair Terry McAuliffe, raised enormous sums. At the end of the administration, people came to collect. Politics is a dirty business of power, influence, and money; for eight years Clinton has been the puppet-master. Political allies won't care about protecting Clinton or any other politician once they are out of power. Now that the influence of the office no longer shields the ex-President, perhaps Americans are finally realizing that maybe there wasn't a "Right Wing Conspiracy" after all.