RealWorldGraduation_Question_99_PAC_Workers <– PDF
Many members of Congress hire their spouses or other relatives to work on their permanent campaign staff or political action committees [1]. These people are paid by either the campaign funds or from contributions made to the political action committees. It is not necessary that the relatives, as employees, perform any particular task as part of their employment. It is legal for members of Congress to put relatives on their payroll for these jobs, but in what ways might it be considered unethical or immoral?
a) If it’s legal, then it cannot be unethical or immoral, so this question is irrelevant.
b) It constitutes nepotism, in which family members get special treatment (good paying jobs) simply for being relatives.
c) It is possible that the relatives are no-shows, simply being paid as a means to enhance the family income without actual work being performed.
d) It is possible that the family member is less qualified than other people to perform these tasks, so the organization is not getting the best talent for the money.
e) Some combination of b), c), and d).
[1] Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, Outrage, New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2007, pp. 111-115
(The answer is on p. 2 of the PDF.)
