Spitzer's Double Standard

April 4, 2008

by Alexandra Siegel

On April 7th, 2004 New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer advocated for the arrests of 18 people associated with an alleged high-end escort service. He proclaimed, “This…organization…was nothing more than a prostitution ring, and now its owners and operators will be held accountable.” Just three years later this “tough-on-crime politician” is again dealing with allegations of prostitution rings — but this time he’s the one under investigation. It is now alleged that over the last few years Spitzer, or “Mr. Clean” as he was affectionately and ironically known, has paid up to $80,000 for various prostitution services. While tabloids have jumped on the opportunity to cover the Spitzer story as just another salacious scandal, the issue at stake should not be Spitzer’s personal “sexcapades,” but rather that his behavior makes a mockery of his political platforms. Politicians should be able to keep their private lives out of politics, but to earn this privilege, they have to stop legislating on the personal affairs (no pun intended) of their constituents.


While this kind of scandal may not be a new phenomenon, the number of reported incidents has recently skyrocketed. Spitzer’s case is actually relatively tame when compared with some of the others. For example, in June of 2007 Idaho Senator Larry Craig was arrested for soliciting sex from an undercover police officer in a Minneapolis men’s room. Again, the issue here is not Craig’s behavior or sexual orientation, but rather the fact that he continually voted to restrict gay rights. Craig ran for the senate on an anti-gay, “family values” platform. He voted to ban same sex marriages in Idaho and voted against hate crime prevention legislation. Craig should have the right to make personal choices and to keep his sexual life private — but by the same token, he should not use his political power to discriminate against other citizens based on their personal choices and private activities.


Another noteworthy example of this hypocrisy is Republican Congressman Mark Foley’s sex scandal. In 2006, evidence surfaced that Foley had sent sexually explicit emails and instant messages to teenage congressional pages. Aside from the fact that this kind of sexual harassment is simply illegal, Foley is both politically anti-gay and the former chairman of the House caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. No American should be sexually harassing teenage boys, but this principle doubly applies to a man who runs for office championing himself as a protector of children. Certainly Foley’s personal life would deserve more privacy if he stopped imposing his own hypocritical “morality” on his constituents.


While some politicians may open their private lives to scrutiny by legislating on the personal lives of citizens, in most cases these matters shouldn’t enter politics. For example, soon after Spitzer’s replacement David Patterson was inaugurated, he and his wife both publicly acknowledged having had extramarital affairs. The Pattersons were just trying to be honest with the people of New York and prevent similar altercations from arising, but their marital problems should have no bearing on Paterson’s gubernatorial credentials. As long as Paterson is not legislating on the extramarital rights of the people of New York, his own affairs should be kept private.


This same logic could be applied to Bill Clinton’s infamous interactions with Monica Lewinsky. It was wrong for Clinton to have lied on the witness stand and yes, perjury is arguably grounds for impeachment, but what did the “girl in the blue dress” have to do with Clinton’s job performance as Commander-in-Chief? While Clinton’s debacle was particularly detrimental to his image, history is full of similar scandals. Thomas Jefferson allegedly fathered illegitimate children with a slave woman. Grover Cleveland had an illegitimate son prompting critics to chant, “Ma, ma where’s my Pa? Gone to the White House, ha ha ha.” FDR carried on an affair which was not revealed until years after his death, and William Harding got around, too. Eisenhower’s mistress later published a book about their affair and JFK engaged in plenty of extramarital activity, most notably with Marilyn Monroe. Each of these presidents had their own “Monica Lewinskys,” but their legacies were not tarnished like Clinton’s. None of these actions are particularly justifiable from an ethical standpoint, but the presidential credentials of these men should be evaluated separately from their private lives in so far as their private actions do not conflict with their political duties.


Shortly after the Spitzer scandal erupted, Spitzer’s brother told the Washington Post, “If men never succumbed to the attractions of women, then the human species would have died out a long time ago.” Rather than argue tactless Darwinian defenses, perhaps we should work instead to evolve a legislative culture in which the government stays out of private matters among consenting adults. Only when politicians like Spitzer, Craig, and Foley stop legislating on the personal activities of their constituents will they deserve their own rights to privacy.

Alexandra Siegel is a freshman who has not yet declared a major.