Criminology

Public administration is a serous task that needs full corporation and participation of leaders. The most important thing in public leadership is the build up of trust and a coherent relationship among all leadership departments and official to avoid unnecessary failures. Transparency and accountability are key factors to leadership of both small and big groups. Good leaders need to be in a position to meet deadlines and fulfill the demands of the led. In bureaucratic associations like State leadership, administration is not an easy task (Zacharias Fred, 2007). Leaders are expected to follow protocol in all their under takings to ensure that work ethics are adhered to otherwise they will face a lot of criticism from all over the society.

It is important to learn that internal controls as well as external controls are worth upon holding for any functional government. Conflicting interests, political influence and financial problems are the most common problems among many democracies. These problems have resulted in corruption and interruption of the normal working protocol of governments in both developed and developing nations (Calo Thomas, 2008). The failure to regulate political interest is such a great danger that majority of the leaders are unable to produce effectively yet their responsibility in the congress or parliament is to represent the interest of citizens.

Internal control refers to practice of taking charge and full responsibility by leaders to ensure that accountability and trust on public property and fund is enforced. If for example political parties and individual politicians are not checked from internal control checks they may end up exploiting the public in different ways through corruption, fraud, and untimely feedback. It is expected that government representatives are expected to own up to respective work ethics. Internal controls include formalized and organized procedural structures that assure integrity, professional competence and ethical conduct by leaders all with the aim of good performance of national or organizational goals. In addition, internal security checks are very vital in national progress and appropriate administration (Kamensky John, 1996).

On the other hand, eternal controls involve that selection of an appropriate watch dog to govern or supervise some State functions that need close mentoring by a non partisan group. For example an electoral commission that controls elections in a State need not be an affiliate to any of the national political parties so as to generate good results of any election (Bozoki Andras, 2002).  Anti-corruption commissions are another good example of external controls that can help in the correction of a national leadership if it is not in order. External audit systems should also be applied to different departments of a national leadership so as to ensure accountability on public funds.

However despite the common knowledge of the role of internal and external checks, most governments have problem with corruption due to political affiliations of leaders within the different control bodies of the governments.

Leadership should not be taken for granted if national progress is to be achieved. Taking for example the Bush administration in America which is rated the lowest in State financial administration, has left the government crippling in a very large economic deficit due to lack of proper financial policies. Lots of finances were used in support of war and corruption while little attention was laid in the development of economy. Bush administration left a national debt of about 62 trillion in Medicare and social security. Apart from this there was other debt that needed to be recovered by the next governments administration in the U.S. This is a pity. Respect for leadership positions should be created among governments to avoid unnecessary debts for the society.

In connection to good governance in the United States, government reforms of the government Act of 1989 serves to correct corruption and unfair treatment within the government.  The government Act of 1989 as signed by President Bush had policies that guarded the security of different organs of the government.  Government leaders were barred from receiving honoraria (Bouza Tony, 1996).  All federal employees were no longer supposed to receive gifts of different kinds, there were also some limitations that were imposed on different officials and unemployed categories of people so as to bar corruption from government official.  This Act of 1989 was meant to streamline government spending and reduce chances of fraud and theft on public funds.  Unfair treatment of workers poor services resulting from incapability of jobseekers to pay for bribes became punishable offence after the signing of the Act of government.

The reforms were a great advantage to the citizens. With the reforms, able citizen were now more accessible to government services and would not be locked out of the civil service through corruption or bribery.  The main objective of the government Act of 1989 was to initiate equitable government systems that offer fair treatment to all.  The Act on 1989 states that federal leaders should not receive gifts from employees be it a contribution, a solicited contributions, donations form any employees or federal official. The ethics as described by the government Act of 1989 bars any kind of gift within the work sector that may influence performance of employees and employers so as to act as a bribe or corruption.

The government during this reform has defined clear salary expectations for different officers so as to avoid unnecessary government spending on tokens and gifts that promote theft and fraud.  The salaries for judges are stipulated in the Government Act.

More over, government spending on education and seminar attendance for official has been assigned a board to administrators thus avoiding poor spending of public funds in the sector. The congress then serves to correct the boards decision if need be.  The congress also approves for the functions of the different organs of the government to ensure accountability.

However, the clause does not preclude officials from receiving gifts on behalf of U.S government.  Government policies do not allow government spending on additional compensation to judges fro the reasons of their good performance (Allen Francis, 1996).  It is their duty to perform effectively and productively according to the professional ethics of their job.  It is said to extravagant if they just receive token for the duty that they have been assigned to do.  Government funding should be protected and used in the correct possible ways as stipulated by the government of U.S.

In conclusion, if government and other administrative forces are not checked they end up being corrupt and waste state funds in undertakings that are of self interest.  This is the worst kind of government a society may have.  More so according to the government Act of 1989, if state leaders never receive gifts and bribes of any kind then national funds may never be wasted.  Integrity in federal offices is a very important virtue towards development of government policies and use of public funds.  This is the overall theme for having good leadership and appropriate governance.  In addition, there is need for accountability and responsibility in federal offices for responsible leadership.