This 25-‐minute documentary draws from footage shot at The University of Texas at Austin when former lobbyist and convicted felon Jack Abramoff visited to talk about his life, politics, prison, and corrupt lobbying in Washington, D.C. During the Bush Administration, Abramoff was the most influential lobbyist in Washington, D.C.
He was also at the center of one of the most significant political scandals since Watergate.His excesses led to his downfall and that of Congress members with whom he was closely connected, including aides, business associates, government officials, and lawmakers. As a video case,In It to Win: The Jack Abramoff Storyincludes the documentary, six short videos that each focus on a behavioral ethics bias as illustrated by Abramoff’s story, and a written casestudy.
The documentary can be used on its own to stimulate discussion about ethical issues andlapses, or used with its supporting materials to supplement topics taught in disciplines such as government, business, and economics. The video case is also appropriate for courses such as American studies, history, political science, law, journalism, communications, film, and psychology.
The main objective of the video case is to illustrate how well intentioned people can make serious ethical errors—and even commit crimes—if they are not careful. It exposes personal and systemic ethical concerns in government and business, and explores the responsibility of the individual to organizations and communities. It also looks at the relationship between law and ethics, issues of power and privilege, and above all, the potential pitfalls any ambitious person faces when operating within a hyper-‐competitive environment.Indeed, Abramoff is not someone who just “doesn’t get” ethics. He believed he was a ‘moral lobbyist’ who fought hard on behalf of his clients.
In retrospect, he can see where he went wrong and appears to regret his errors deeply. Yet, why could he not see this at the time?The kind of decision-‐making errors that Abramoff made are the focus of a field of study known as behavioral ethics, which draws upon psychology, cognitive science, evolutionary biology, and related disciplines to determine how and why people make the ethical and unethical decisions that they do.Much behavioral ethics research addresses the question of why good people do bad things.
1.What are the key points that this documentary raises?
2.What did Abramoff do that was unethical, even if legal? Why were these actions unethical?3.The documentary focuses on Abramoff’s role as a lobbyist within a system that is, he argues, more corrupt than ever. To what degree do individuals have a responsibility to act ethically within a morally corrupt system?
4.The documentary raises the point that white-‐collar crime is generally considered far less problematic than hard crime. Do you agree? Why or why not? What are the long-‐term consequences of white-‐collar crimes for individuals, families, and society?
5.Do you agree with the UT officials who decided to bring Abramoff to campus in order to speak to students and create this film? What ethical issues were involved in their decision-‐making process?
6.Compare Abramoff’s situation with the Lance Armstrong scandal. What similarities can you identify? What differences? What character traits do you think led each man to act illegally and unethically? Are their actions representative of ‘everything wrong’ (i.e. hunger for power, money, fame) with American society?
7.Do you think Abramoff’s success as a lobbyist supports the idea that politicians are corrupt or easily corruptible? Should we place blame on Abramoff and the politicians or the system in which they operate? If the system is fundamentally flawed, is it fair for individual lobbyists or politicians to pay the price?
8.In the film, Abramoff notes that he thought he was the ‘moral lobbyist’? Why does he think so and do you agree with him?
9.Abramoff still owes the government $44 million in restitution. Some argue that he is only speaking out against corruption to get past this debt and regain his prior fame and fortune. Others believe his claim that he is in a unique position to expose the corruption of the system.
Do you believe Abramoff genuinely regrets his prior actions and is now working hard at improving how our government operates? Or do you think heis just ‘out for himself’? Does it matter whether he’s sincere if his actions lead to important reforms?
10.Do you think you could survive in today’s world if you promised yourself that you would always act honorably? Do you think such a life is possible?
