| Ethics, Morality, and Legalities | Unit 1 Individual Project | | | 11/13/2011 |

|

We see and hear about it all the time. Government officials being “paid” to vote a certain way or a company is given a monetary “donation” to show that global warming is bad, but they can continue to release toxins into the air. There was a scandal behind monies being paid to certain members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) by the Salt Lake Olympic Committee (SLOC) in order to ensure that the Olympic Games would indeed be hosted by Salt Lake City. There were forced resignations of the leaders of the SLOC, including the mayor. In this paper, we will discuss the difference between bribery and lobbying, possible arguments against the idea of bribery, and consequences that should have been implemented other than just resigning from a position of power. In order to understand the difference between lobbying and bribery, we must first know what each is respectively. Lobbying is a general term that refers to the act of attempting to impact or influence members of a legislative group to vote in favor of a particular proposition or law. In most cases, lobbying just involves political support offered in return for positive influence or actions. Lobbying is legal in most governments, and does not include any type monetary or financial trade off. Bribery, on the other hand, is a horse of a different color. Bribery involves the offering of money, usually in the form of cash, in return for positive political actions or influence. Monetary contributions are made to a particular group with the expectation that the group’s agenda will be favored in a political or legislative decision. Simply put, bribery is an illegal act of trading money for votes in favor of a specific agenda. There are several possible arguments that SLOC members could