University of Richmond UR Scholarship Repository Honors Theses Student Research 1994 Looking past the surface : a look at the office of Senate and its environment and the implications of public versus private morality Jennifer A. Chaippetta Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons, and the Leadership Studies Commons Recommended Citation Chaippetta, Jennifer A., "Looking past the surface : a look at the office of Senate and its environment and the implications of public versus private morality" (1994). Honors Theses. 1349. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/honors-theses/1349 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Research at UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Looking Past the Surface: A Look at the Office of «' Senate and its Environment and the Implications of Public Versus Private Morality by Jennifer A. Chiappetta ./ Senior Project Jepson School of Leadership Studies University of Richmond Richmond, VA April 1994 UNIVERSITYOF RICHMOND LIBRARIES 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111111111!1111"1'11111~1!1111111111111111111111111111 3 3082 00580 5568 Jepson School of Leadership Studies Senior Project Looking Past The Surface: R Look at the Office of Senate and its Enuironment and the Implications of Public Uersus Priuate Morality April 28, 1994 Jennifer R. Chiappetta Senior Seminar Dr. Ciulla My reasons for doing this particular Senior Project stemmed from an initial personal conflict I had due to my internship experience last fall. Upon learning of the possibility of acquiring an internship at the state office of a United States Senator, I was thrilled. What an excellent opportunity to further my knowledge of leadership! However, my excitement was soon extinguished. When I soon learned of the controversy that surrounded the Democratic Senator from Virginia, Charles Spittal Robb, I had serious second thoughts. Fortunately, there were few alternative internship sites available, the semester was already under way, and I therefore decided to ignore the rumors and to accept the internship position. If I had refused the opportunity, I would have lost an extremely valuable learning experience. The doubts I initially experienced plagued me throughout my internship experience, and have continued to affect me during my Senior Project. The fact that articles focusing on Senator Robb and his alleged indiscretions have continued to surface throughout my involvement with Robb's State Headquarters has not helped to put my insecurity to rest. Instead, I have realized that the Senator's private life is no concern of mine, only his public life. I feel fortunate to have had the internship experience to help me realize that there is more to a Senator than the scandals and stereotypes that surround him. Very early in my internship experience I began to realize the extent to which Robb's staff worked to improve the lives of their constituents. Before my internship experience I had an extremely negative image of senators. I was convinced that they were more concerned about their own personal gain, golf score, reelection, and sexual relations than representing and helping those that had elected them. I soon became aware of my naivete. Maybe it was the dozen, five foot file cabinets filled with thousands of constituent casework files that tipped me off. Or maybe it was the number of calls by concerned constituents that were carefully recorded that gave me a clue. Or better yet, the legislation that my internship supervisor was proposing to help veterans cope with the problems that faced them in veterans hospitals. Or lastly, was it the work Robb's office was doing to help the city of Petersburg with its FEMA appeal that was the reason? Looking back I think it was a combination of all four. In any event, I felt that it was my responsibility to make others aware of these positive and beneficial occurrences in addition to all the negative press people were already aware of. As a leader, I felt that I needed to communicate the good that the Senator's staff was accomplishing to others. This desire became one of the goals outlined in my internship contract: I wil£ attnnpt to dispel t/i.emytfi., to myself anti ot/i.ers,tfi.at politics antipolitical offias are an aEerrationof t/i.eaccepted etliical dimau. 5tfongwitli tliis I wil£ attempt to aetemwie Ii.owa featfercan worfcto communicatetfie idea of katkrsliip as setVia. Therefore, I was thrilled to learn of the project my internship supervisor had planned for me. He was interested in developing a presentation to give to college students about constituent casework. This project directly addressed the above objective, and presented an opportunity to communicate the service contributions of a senator, rather than the scandalous contributions that quenched the media's thirst for dirt. Before my internship experience, I was completely unaware of the existence of casework, and I suspected other college students were in a similar situation. However, most people are aware of the controversy surrounding Robb. I decided it was time that they learned about the positive side as well. Somewhere along the way I decided that Robb's relationship with Tai Collins, or his choice of party activities were not important to me. Although I do not personally agree with the possibility of an extra-marital affair, or a drug-related party, what is relevant to me is his acts in the political arena and the number of people that has helped. It was not any easy process to reach this conclusion. I consider myself a person with high moral standards, and it really bothered me that I was working for someone with such a sordid personal life. It bothered me that the initial excitement on people's faces, that resulted upon hearing of my internship with a United States' Senator, would disappear when I told them the name of that Senator. However, after working in the State Headquarters for four months, I realized that the good the Senator's office contributed to society far outweighed the negative elements of his personal life. My decision to concentrate on Robb's public life is as controversial as his alleged acts. Many people feel that a public servant's private life is relevant to their ability to lead, and to the quality of their leadership. I am not of that belief. The fundamental question is how much do the American people have a right to know about the private lives of their public servants? Is there a distinction between public and private morality, or is it one and the same? Many people support the argument that if a person aspires to be a moral and political leader, than he/ she must exhibit a higher standard than that of the common citizen. (Iggers, Star Tribune.) Along these lines, morality is equated with character, and to some people the character issue is everything. Thomas Reeves, author of A Question of Character: A Life of JohnF. Kennedy, feels the private distinction is bogus. Reeves states that character is "what you are at the deepest level" and that "what you are inevitably affects what you do." In addition, if a person lies or cheats in his private life, then he will be consistent in his public life as well. (Iggers, Star Tribune.) On the flip side, Jay Rosen of New York University feels that there is an important distinction between private and public character. He states that what candidates do in private is largely irrelevant, and what really matters are their public actions. (Iggers, Star Tribune.) Recently, the character issue has been beaten to death by the media harping on the questionable character of its political and social leaders. Gary Hart, Jim Bakker, Chuck Robb, Clarence Thomas, Bill Clinton- all these names have plastered the headlines of America's newspapers at one time or another. But why? Were the headlines related to their positions on the issues, or their positions in bed? Why have these men, and their corresponding women, become household names? Because the media has given these people, and the scandals that surround them, a medium to be observed and heard. Although the media has always played an important role in politics, due to the fact of instant information and advanced technology, their influence has never been felt more strongly. These men and women are the rule makers of the public versus private morality game. Nicholas Von Hoffman, in his article "Should the press play vice cop? Peephole journalism," spoke of the transformation that has occurred in American journalism. Where certain topics were once taboo for publication, today there are no such restrictions. (Von Hoffman, The Nation.) Famous people's sex lives, especially politicians, are fair game, and are often front page stories. Before the Gary Hart/Donna Rice scandal, the policy was not to print or air anything that linked a politician and sex together- unless it had become part of the public record. For example, the Ted Kennedy/Mary Jo Kopechne scandal was reported to the public because it was related to a serious police matter. At this point it had become part of the public record. Another example was when Representative Wilbur Mills was knocked out of politics because of his drunken association with a fan dancer. However, it reached the front page headlines only after the police had arrested them both for being in the tidal basin near the Jefferson Memorial. Lastly, even though Federal Bureau of Investigations agents had offered several newspaper editors the transcripts of a small sex orgy at the Willard Hotel involving Martin Luther King, Jr., the story was never printed.