The post-Watergate reforms were built on norms, not law. The US fell to 29th on the global corruption index — its lowest ever. Every norm becomes law. Every watchdog gets teeth.
We're a policy platform with 50 researched positions on every major issue. This page breaks down our anti-corruption plan — but there's much more to explore.
The United States has fallen to 29th on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index — its lowest ranking ever. In a single generation, America has dropped from the top 15 to behind countries like Estonia, Uruguay, and the Bahamas. The corruption is not hidden. It is legal, institutionalized, and protected by the very people it benefits.
American corruption does not look like corruption in failed states. There are no brown envelopes changing hands in dark hallways. Instead, the United States has perfected legal corruption — a system where money influences policy through channels that are technically lawful but fundamentally corrosive. A pharmaceutical company does not bribe a senator to vote against drug pricing reform. Instead, it donates to the senator's campaign, funds their super PAC, hires their former chief of staff as a lobbyist, offers the senator a seven-figure consulting contract upon retirement, and pays for industry-funded "research" that the senator cites on the floor. The outcome is identical to bribery. The mechanism is legal.
The revolving door between Congress and K Street is the engine of this system. Sixty-three percent of retiring members of Congress become lobbyists — taking their relationships, their institutional knowledge, and their access to the Capitol with them. The current 2-year cooling-off period is the weakest in the developed world, riddled with loopholes that allow "strategic consulting" from day one.
Congressional insider trading adds another layer of corruption. Despite the STOCK Act of 2012, members of Congress continue to trade individual stocks while having access to classified briefings, advance knowledge of legislation, and nonpublic regulatory information. Estimated abnormal returns from congressional trading total $600 million per year. Penalties for violations — when enforced at all — are as low as $200.
Regulatory capture completes the picture. The agencies created to protect the public interest — the SEC, the FCC, the FAA, the EPA — are routinely led by former industry executives who return to industry after their government service. The result is regulation that protects incumbents rather than consumers, enforcement that treats violations as the cost of doing business, and a public that has lost faith in the basic promise that government serves the people. For the full breakdown, see the ethics and anti-corruption issue page.
The revolving door is the pipeline between Congress and K Street — between public service and private lobbying. Sixty-three percent of retiring members of Congress become lobbyists. They take their relationships, their access, and their institutional knowledge with them — and sell it to the highest bidder.
The mechanics are straightforward. A member of Congress spends a career building relationships with colleagues, regulatory agencies, and committee staff. They develop expertise in specific policy areas — defense, healthcare, finance, energy, technology. When they retire or lose an election, lobbying firms and corporations offer them salaries that dwarf their congressional pay — not because of their policy expertise, but because of their access. A former senator can walk onto the Senate floor. A former representative has lifetime access to the House gym, dining rooms, and the personal offices of current members. That access is what lobbying firms are buying.
The current 2-year cooling-off period is almost meaningless. Former officials are prohibited from directly lobbying their former colleagues for two years — but they can immediately begin "strategic consulting," which involves directing lobbying campaigns, advising clients on legislative strategy, and coaching registered lobbyists on which arguments will resonate with which members. The distinction between lobbying and strategic consulting is a legal fiction. Everyone in Washington knows it.
The revolving door also spins in the other direction. Industry executives and lobbyists enter government to write the regulations that govern their former employers. Former pharmaceutical executives lead the FDA. Former Wall Street partners lead the SEC. Former telecom lobbyists lead the FCC. The result is regulatory capture — a system where the regulators become industry advocates, enforcement disappears, and the public interest is subordinated to private profit.
The Common Good plan imposes a 10-year ban on lobbying by former members of Congress, senior staff, and presidential appointees. Strategic consulting is included in the ban. Violations carry criminal penalties, not administrative fines. For the complete framework, see the full anti-corruption plan and the campaign finance reform page.
The Common Good plan is built on one principle: every norm must become law. The post-Watergate reforms relied on voluntary compliance, good faith, and institutional norms. All three have failed. The plan replaces norms with statutes, voluntary compliance with mandatory enforcement, and self-policing with independent oversight.
These eight reforms target the structural mechanisms that enable legal corruption in America. Each one addresses a specific failure in the current system. Together, they create an anti-corruption framework with no loopholes and real consequences.
For the complete plan with legislative detail, enforcement mechanisms, and sourcing, see the full anti-corruption issue page.
The United States ranks 29th on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index — behind Estonia, Barbados, and the Bahamas. Countries that consistently rank in the top 10 share a common trait: they turned anti-corruption norms into enforceable law decades ago.
| Country | CPI Rank | Lobbying Rules | Stock Ban | Cooling-Off | Disclosure | Enforcement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 29th | Weak / loopholes | No (STOCK Act unenforced) | 2 years | Paper / delayed | Self-policing (Congress) |
| Denmark | 1st | Strict transparency | Yes (full ban) | N/A (public culture) | Real-time public | Independent body |
| Finland | 2nd | Registered / transparent | Yes | 5 years | Full / electronic | Chancellor of Justice |
| New Zealand | 3rd | Strict / transparent | Yes (blind trust) | 5 years | Full / public | Serious Fraud Office |
| Germany | 9th | Registered (2022 law) | Restricted | 12-18 months | Full / electronic | Federal prosecutors |
| Japan | 16th | Restricted | Restricted | 2 years (strict) | Full / public | Board of Audit |
The pattern is clear: countries with the lowest corruption have the strongest laws — not the strongest norms. Denmark does not rely on politicians to voluntarily disclose their finances. Finland does not trust officials to police themselves. New Zealand does not assume good faith will prevent conflicts of interest. They wrote it into law, created independent enforcement bodies, and imposed real consequences for violations. The United States did not — and the results speak for themselves.
Sources: Transparency International, OECD Government Integrity Indicators, Global Integrity Report. See the Compare Parties page for detailed comparisons.
The STOCK Act of 2012 was supposed to end congressional insider trading. It didn't. The Ethics in Government Act was supposed to ensure financial transparency. It hasn't. Voluntary ethics commitments, disclosure requirements, and cooling-off periods have all failed — because they rely on the people they regulate to enforce them.
The STOCK Act is the clearest example. The law prohibits members of Congress from trading on material nonpublic information — but enforcement is handled by the congressional ethics committees themselves. Between 2020 and 2024, over 100 members of Congress made trades that coincided with legislation or classified briefings they were directly involved in. The total penalties assessed during that period amounted to a handful of $200 fines for late disclosure — not a single prosecution for insider trading. The SEC, which has the authority to investigate, has never brought a case against a sitting member of Congress.
The fundamental problem is self-policing. Congress investigates its own members. The Senate Ethics Committee and the House Ethics Committee are staffed by the very people they are supposed to oversee. There is no independent enforcement body, no external audit mechanism, and no mandatory referral to the Department of Justice for violations. In any other context — a corporation allowing its board to investigate itself, a hospital allowing its surgeons to review their own malpractice — this arrangement would be regarded as self-evidently corrupt. In Congress, it is the norm.
Voluntary ethics do not work for the same reason voluntary tax compliance without audits would not work. When there are no consequences for violations, compliance becomes optional. When the enforcers are the same people being regulated, enforcement becomes performative. When penalties are negligible compared to the profits from misconduct, the calculus is obvious.
Real oversight requires independence. The Common Good plan creates an independent Office of Public Integrity with prosecutorial referral authority, subpoena power, and guaranteed funding. Financial disclosures are verified independently — not self-reported. Stock trading is banned outright — not regulated through a system that has already proven incapable of regulation. The question is not whether politicians can follow the rules. It is whether the rules are designed to be followed — and right now, they are not. See the full ethics and anti-corruption page for the complete enforcement framework.
Corruption benefits from cynicism. The more Americans believe corruption is inevitable, natural, or equally distributed, the less likely they are to demand the structural reforms that would actually end it. Here are the four most persistent myths — and what the evidence shows.
Myth: "Both sides are equally corrupt — it doesn't matter who you vote for."
Reality: The "both sides" argument is the most effective tool corruption has. It breeds apathy, depresses voter turnout, and discourages the structural reforms that would actually change the system. While corruption exists across the political spectrum, it is not evenly distributed — and more importantly, the solution is not to accept it as inevitable but to build systems that prevent it regardless of which party holds power. The Common Good plan does not target one party. It targets the structures that enable corruption — the revolving door, self-policing ethics committees, weak disclosure requirements, and non-existent enforcement — regardless of who benefits from them. See the party comparison page for specifics.
Myth: "Lobbying is just free speech — restricting it violates the First Amendment."
Reality: The Common Good plan does not ban lobbying. Citizens have every right to petition their government — and always will. What the plan bans is the revolving door that makes lobbying so effective: former officials trading on taxpayer-funded relationships for private profit. A 10-year lobbying ban does not restrict anyone's speech. It restricts their ability to sell their access. The First Amendment protects your right to call your senator. It does not protect a former senator's right to make $2 million per year selling access to the colleagues they used to serve with.
Myth: "Corruption is inevitable in any government — you can't legislate morality."
Reality: Denmark, Finland, and New Zealand prove otherwise. These countries do not have uniquely virtuous politicians — they have strong anti-corruption laws, independent enforcement, and real consequences for violations. The United States once ranked among the least corrupt countries on Earth. Its decline is not the result of moral decay — it is the result of specific policy choices: gutting enforcement, weakening disclosure requirements, allowing unlimited dark money in elections, and tolerating a revolving door that every other democracy has restricted. Corruption is not inevitable. It is a policy failure — and policy failures have policy solutions.
Myth: "Term limits alone would fix corruption."
Reality: Term limits address one symptom — career politicians — but not the underlying disease. In states with term limits, the revolving door often spins faster, because legislators have even more incentive to cultivate industry relationships early in their terms. Lobbying influence actually increases in term-limited legislatures, because inexperienced legislators rely more heavily on lobbyists for policy expertise. Term limits without lobbying bans, stock trading prohibitions, and independent enforcement simply accelerate the corruption cycle. The Common Good plan supports term limits as one element of a comprehensive reform package — not as a standalone solution. For the full democratic reform agenda, see the voting rights and elections page.
Click any question to expand the answer.
Have a question not answered here? Read the full anti-corruption issue page or visit our site-wide FAQ.
Check back soon for policy analysis of government corruption news.
The US has fallen to 29th on the global corruption index. The revolving door spins. Congress polices itself. This ends with laws that cannot be ignored and enforcement that cannot be defunded. Read the full plan.