Question: Name a recent, well-known CEO who ascended to the job despite a history of self-dealing which engulfed him in accusations of corruption, who from his first days of employment was surrounded by scandal, some old, some new, covering the gambit from sexual harassment in the workplace, suicide of an associate, felony convictions of colleagues, and lying under oath. He is a man who had publicized liaisons at the office while enemies of his organization were planning its destruction; one who even stole the furniture when he finally left his position and for good measure facilitated the release of some evil people from jail, arguably in exchange for donations to his favorite charity. Yet he maintains the confidence of those he served and even today is admired as a celebrity wherever he goes, commanding upwards of two hundred fifty thousand dollars for a speech and millions of dollars for his memoirs.

Need a clue? It happened in the most sophisticated, progressive, enlightened democratic country in the history of the world. It's not Bernard Ebbers, Dennis Kozlowski, Sam Waksal, Martha Stewart, or Kenneth Lay. Of course it is the forty-second President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, the Teflon President. To my mind the fast and loose style that characterized his anything goes tenure is largely responsible for many challenges this country faces today.

I know what you're thinking: "Here they go again. Two years after leaving office everything bad is still Clinton's fault. Get over it." Well, hear me out. Let us connect the dots to understand what has happened to our country. Clinton created an atmosphere in which negative repercussions were destined to reverberate through the entire spectrum of life's activities. A leader with no shame and no standards except "what's best for me at any cost." For the children he proclaimed oral sex is not sex. For the adults he demonstrated that one could slip through any conundrum, if slick enough, deceitful enough, and willing to expend whatever capital it took to prevail. Houdini would have been impressed.

It seems as if everyday another person of wealth and power is implicated in scandal. Enron got the ball rolling at the end of last year when the deceptive practices of its executives came to the fore. Subsequent revelations of malfeasance have enveloped Arthur Anderson, Tyco, Rite Aid, WorldCom, ImClone, just to name a few, turning our business media and magazines essentially into tabloid journalism. There have always been some corrupt people at every tier of society. However, this deluge of magnates gone astray simultaneously is unparalleled.

These shenanigans are crucifying the average citizen. Jobs are being lost that are difficult to replace. College funds and retirement plans are being wiped out at an alarming rate. It is becoming difficult for some families to even pay their utility bills as liquid assets dwindle. These abuses currently being uncovered were conceived and nurtured during the excesses of the freewheeling 1990's, the Clinton years.

Why did so many formerly reputable executives push the envelope over the edge and engage in illicit business practices? Many experts postulate that one explanation for the explosion of improprieties is greed. No doubt some humans are inherently avaricious, but this has always been true. The current spate of leading companies under investigation, however, is unprecedented. The country has endured the failings of Robert Vesco, Ivan Boesky, Michael Milken, and certainly others but nothing to the degree and management levels seen today.

Some pundits believe stock options, originally designed to encourage executives to invest in their companies, are the culprits. This explanation also falls short. There have always been incentives for CEOs to perform. Traditionally they have been well- compensated in salary and seemingly limitless perks.

The public in general and investors in particular are losing confidence with this wholesale breakdown in fiduciary responsibility. They seek an explanation as to why corporate boards failed to provide adequate oversight; why regulators, such as the SEC, were apparently asleep at the switch; how major corporations became pawns of white collar con artists; and whether the low standards are limited to a handful of high profile charlatans or has it snowballed into a system wide disaster. What precipitated this epidemic, this collapse in ethics beyond the pale of normal high stakes, high pressure business practices? What series of events made those corporate bigwigs cross the line and shun the law in order to appease their rapacious desires? Historically most business leaders did their best to grow companies to prosper in the market place, but recognized there were ethical and legal limitations. Rarely did management run a business into the ground and still walk away with tens of millions of dollars in severance pay, bonuses, and miscellaneous benefits. This is not an indictment of all, but there does appear a growing trend among corporate hotshots to disregard the limits of propriety.

The myriad of business transgressions suggests a sea change in thinking, a moral compass run amuck. Some evidently have erroneously concluded that there are no boundaries. They have everything but still want more. They believe they can befuddle the public, the authorities, and exploit the system with impunity.

I believe these patterns were at the very least accelerated when the self-proclaimed "most ethical administration" entered the White House on January 20, 1993. Of course the Clinton administration was anything but moral and quickly became immersed in never ending scandals. However, the Clintons were always able to use their wits and power to evade responsibility. The message sent and the lesson learned was that the powerful can do wrong and walk away unscathed. A politicized Justice Department reinforced the perception. Obfuscation, bungling, or simply caving in to the powerful and well-connected became the norm as exemplified by numerous lax prosecutions. This may have contributed to a relaxing of ethics and moral decay amongst some business elite. It is only logical for some to have rationalized that if Clinton could wrong and not only survive, but flourish, why can't they. If the President of the United States can lie to the American people, then why can't a CEO prevaricate to the shareholders. After all, the president is ultimately responsible for the entire economy, not just a single business empire. It should be no surprise that we are in an environment of rampant corruption. The primary deterrent to crime and abuse of power is punishment and rebuke, but the Clinton travails were ameliorated by a duplicitous Department of Justice and an adoring media.

Many executives apparently miscalculated their own chances of success once they embarked on that slippery slope of shady strategies to inflate their stock prices and make more money. Now these perpetrators are paying and so is the entire country. Unfortunately it is too late to stop this round of job cuts, asset reductions, and investor uncertainty. It is imperative that the public gleans something positive from these events in order to prevent another wave of corporate corruption. People must again comprehend that standards and the rule of law comprise the foundations of our society and are necessary for our country to grow and prosper. The government must vigorously pursue each case to demonstrate that the powerful are not above the law. Confidence in financial reportings must be restored, otherwise our economy may never recover.

From these occurrences society must also understand the theory of trickle down morality. People learn acceptable behavior from their superiors: parents, teachers, and employers. As one progresses up the social hierarchy, one's actions have a broader influence. Thus we must hold those who have reached the top to the highest standards. If the public can accept this, perhaps some good will come from this sorry chapter in our history.

While we are connecting the dots, it is important to keep President Clinton in perspective. He is not a lovable rogue, not a Professor Harold Hill-like character from the Broadway musical Music Man. Rather he is a flawed leader whose shortcomings will continue to have a profound effect on many aspects of our society for years to come.

Taking the connecting dots metaphor one step further: Why is President George W. Bush riding a crest of popularity almost one year post 9/11, despite being bogged down in Afghanistan with a struggling economy and a gut wrenching stock market decline? I believe the American people are realizing the importance of honesty and integrity in our leaders. That character does in fact count. As we have come to know him, we see those traits in his eyes. A humility that trumps even the charm and arrogance of a Rhodes Scholar. We know that he would not hold up air traffic at LA Airport for two hours to get a haircut on Air Force One.

Perhaps on a subconscious level many people easily accepted a president with such obvious character defects because it made them feel better about their own foibles, but in their hearts they knew it wasn't right. Americans are currently in a transition between Clinton and Bush. Just like children who misbehave, not because they are bad, but to test parental authority, to have limits defined, and to distinguish right from wrong, adults too are looking for a guiding light. Despite the inevitable political compromises, they see in Bush someone who is not there for celebrity or just for himself, but rather one who is there for all of us and the good of our country. President Bush is that beacon in the night taking society away from the brink, stepping us back from the precipice, and preventing the United States from becoming a modern day Sodom and Gomorrah.

As for Mr. Clinton, he is the anti-Bush. Whether Bill Clinton was a product of a society in decline, or merely a proponent, or the primary propagator of moral and ethical decay is a debate in which historians have yet to write the final chapter.

Jason D. Fodeman is the author of the forthcoming book How to Destroy a Village: What the Clintons Taught a Seventeen Year Old. He is currently interning with U.S. Congressman Christopher Shays and will be entering his sophomore year at Johns Hopkins in the fall.

For questions or comments please contact Jason at Jason@AIM.org