What would William O. Douglas do?

Here's how the late Supreme Court justice and Washington native approached the challenge of fostering integrity in government.

William O. Douglas.

William O. Douglas.

With both presidential candidates calling for change, it's good to get a reminder of what government ought to look like. So many federal departments have been broken in recent years and have been ridden with cronyism (FEMA) partisanship (the Justice Department) and scandal (Interior Department), that we've become used to seeing a governing style of foxes watching hen houses. Now, with a major financial crisis that has even Wall Streeters and Republicans calling for greater regulation, what is the model for reform?

While there are many good people in public service, fish do rot from the head down, and much of the recent blame goes to George W. Bush for appointing industry lobbyists to "regulate" or "watchdog" their former bosses and current friends. This has created corrosive climates. It's been surprising to me that the Minerals Management Service debacle has not gotten more attention since it goes to the heart of both how government has been run (or not) even in critical areas, like energy, and to the need for major reform. The MMS, based in Denver, has been failing to collect royalties due the government from private industry and has been operating with what investigators call a "a culture of substance abuse and promiscuity." According to The New York Times:

The report says that eight officials in the royalty program accepted gifts from energy companies whose value exceeded limits set by ethics rules – including golf, ski and paintball outings; meals and drinks; and tickets to a Toby Keith concert, a Houston Texans football game and a Colorado Rockies baseball game.

The investigation also concluded that several of the officials "frequently consumed alcohol at industry functions, had used cocaine and marijuana, and had sexual relationships with oil and gas company representatives."

Coke, sex, and ripping off taxpayers — I'm sorry, but I find this much more interesting than hypothetical pigs and whether they wear lipstick.

I happen to be reading the memoirs of Washington's own William O. Douglas, the Yakima-bred Supreme Court justice known for his strong civil libertarian and environmental views. But before he was appointed to the court in 1939 by Franklin D. Roosevelt, he was one of a slew of young lawyers FDR brought to Washington, D.C., to run the alphabet-soup of New Deal agencies. Douglas stuck out for his dogged independence — he was no yes-man to FDR and the Democrats, but he had the support of "the Boss" (and was a poker buddy) nevertheless. His assignment was to run the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and institute reforms in the system — or lack thereof — that helped bring on the collapse of the stock market and the Great Depression.

Granted, memoirs are self-serving, but throughout Douglas' book about the years leading up to his court career, Go East, Young Man, Douglas makes observations about the inner workings of government that are very frank and opinionated, and bipartisan in their criticisms. Indeed, one of the hallmarks of Douglas' career was his ability to consult and befriend people who were ideologically at the opposite end of the spectrum from himself, and his willingness to judge honestly those liberals who failed to meet the character test in public service. He was no moralist, but he did expect integrity regardless of ideology. He was also a critic of aspects of the New Deal itself, and suggested that all new federal agencies be sunseted. FDR did not take him up on that.

Douglas remarks on aspects of government culture that he observed as having changed between the 1930s, when he was a New Dealer, and the '70s, when he watched scandals like Watergate unfold. As as an expert in corporate law, he knew the difficulties in trying to craft genuine oversight amid the pressures toward compromise and corruption. So I was especially struck by the following passage about the SEC and how it contrasts sharply with our sense of how government works these days. To me, it also suggests a model for how things should be if either Sens. John McCain or Barrack Obama are serious about reform. Douglas writes:

We were rich in talent at the SEC; and the energies of the men seemed endless. We would all work until six, take two hours out for dinner, be back at eight and work until midnight or later, reporting by nine o'clock the next morning for another day.

The SEC had a staff of eighteen hundred men and women, and I was proud of them all, There were no "fixers" on the staff, and if one was suspected, he was quietly dropped. These were honest, idealistic, hardworking, and loyal men and women to the nth degree.

The industry never took them to lunch or dinner, all invitations by industry-connected people to spend weekends on yachts off Long Island or elsewhere were politely turned down. We were not holier-than-thou; we simply did not desire to get entangled in social affairs with those we were regulating, and thus unwittingly blunt the edges of the law. In my five years at the SEC only one man was dismissed, not because he had taken a bribe but because he exuded his susceptibility.

The SEC early became quite popular in government circles. We had of course plenty of antagonists, but no taint of unethical conduct ever touched it, nor did partisan politics motivate it, Above all else, the commission's performance was highly professional. Forty years after the SEC was established it still had the best professional staff of any agency in Washington. And it was not until 1973 that the first whiff of scandal touched it.

No sex, coke, or Toby Keith tickets. Oversight without partisanship, fear, or favor. Competent, professional employees. No Jack Abramoffs or Brownies to help run the show. No culture of revenge. Is such a government even possible?

One thing is clear. What Douglas experienced at the SEC would not have happened without a boss who tolerated and encouraged such independence. Not that FDR didn't make political appointments or decisions, but he also knew the value of solving the nation's multiple crises by delegating to honest, top-notch, independent people. One of the biggest cultural challenges McCain or Obama will have to address is changing the perception that Washington is a pastry cart at which pigs of all kinds can feed.


About the Author

Knute Berger is Mossback, Crosscut's chief Northwest native. He also writes the monthly Grey Matters column for Seattle magazine and is a weekly Friday guest on Weekday on KUOW-FM (94.9). His newest book is Pugetopolis: A Mossback Takes On Growth Addicts, Weather Wimps, and the Myth of Seattle Nice, published by Sasquatch Books. In 2011, he was named Writer-in-Residence at the Space Needle and is author of Space Needle, The Spirit of Seattle (2012), the official 50th anniversary history of the tower. You can e-mail him at mossback@crosscut.com.

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Wed, Sep 17, 6:04 p.m. Inappropriate

Thanks...: for the reminder of what's possible.

Posted Wed, Sep 17, 11:35 p.m. Inappropriate

Some thoughts...: Are you channeling the late William O. Douglas's spirit? That must be it; otherwise this is just one person's opinion.

The only thing particularly outstanding about Justice Douglas's term on the SCOTUS was its duration. He voted to uphold the internment of Japanese-Americans, and his opinions were filled with philosophical musings, pop culture references, and other irrelevant observations. He was also a devotee of the latest cause du jour and his financial dealings would never fly in today's era of transparency.

Posted Thu, Sep 18, 11:47 a.m. Inappropriate

Justice Douglas: One of the tricky parts of human history is taking the contributions of a leader in context - human flaws are present in us all and it is only the assertion of absence of same that should draw suspicion and attack.

...as the legal profession itself is doing these days.

If you haven't figured it out there are an awful lot of legal folks that profit from foreclosures, including, very definitely, the WAMU counsel crowd.

FWIW, Douglas was also himself a big fan on the old school Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, also very much a 'living' historical figure.

-Douglas Tooley

Posted Thu, Sep 18, 12:23 p.m. Inappropriate

Justice isn't independent of the era it was created: Supreme court justices have always interested me. How they are selected and how often they moved in directions independent of those that appointed them is fascinating. Only because I just visited one of Douglas's old mountain stomping grounds did I decide to read some of his books. I've only begun, but have been struck by the fact that this man had more opportunities to meet and work at all levels of the American social order than any of his contemporaries on the court.

Douglas rode the rails, had hobo friends, picked fruit and worked at more different jobs than those in the beltway knew existed. Whether right or wrong it gave him a very different perspective of justice as seen by the American people. There is little doubt it influenced his decisions. Where one comes from and from what moment in history you live has everything to do with how you might make judgements.

A comment intended to demean his character mentioned that he approved the internment of the Japanese in camps during the second world war. Do we forget that the US government waged an extensive publicly financed propaganda campaign against all Japanese. The government used bill boards everywhere, movies and steady radio hate messages. We may never know whether Douglas's decision saved Japanese lives. My guess is he thought it would. Philosophically it branded him as a racist operating outside the constitution, but you needed to have lived in that period to understand that thousands of Japanese would have been killed by American mobs had the Japanese tried to survive during the war years in their homes. Older Japanese understood some of this, but their children and those of later generations had no real sense of the level of anger against the Japanese. It would be hard to comprehend what it would be like to live in a community with signboards on every corner that proclaimed if you were a true American you should "Kill a JAP."
KK

Posted Thu, Sep 18, 11:37 p.m. Inappropriate

RE: Justice isn't independent of the era it was created: The poster comments that Justice Douglas voted to intern American citizens to protect them. That reminds me of that Vietnam-era quote "It became necessary to destroy the village in order to save it." I'm sure Nazis also claimed the ghetto was for the Jews safety.

There certainly was a strong propaganda campaign against the Empire of Japan; however, there was not a propaganda campaign against Japanese-Americans and the suggestion that US citizens would have run amok hanging Japanese-Americans from the lampposts is simply ludicrous. Most of the Japanese interns were from the west coast. Many more Japanese living in the Midwest and east coast were not interned, none were lynched, and many served in the armed forces.

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »