Why Martha, But Not George?

One ran a multi media conglomerate, proclaimed as the diva of domesticity. Taking a magazine and television show on to great success. Going on to become a lifestyle guru, whose opinions were the final statement on taste. The other a CEO of a baseball team, a director of an energy firm, Governor of Texas and now a sitting President. Yet despite equally grave ethical happenings in the energy firm, it’s the diva going to prison, the director in a quest for another four years as President. Why one, but not the other?

The answer is found in an article by Joe Conason in the New York Observer. Conason recounts the travails of Martha Stewart, her stock troubles and the fumbled attempt at a cover up on any inside knowledge. Yet the story of the President’s time at Harken energy, offers up even more interesting asides.

As director at Harken, George Bush profited to the tune of 845,000 dollars when the stock of the stock was run up and then sold, just before a spectacular crash. Martha made a mere 45,000 dollars. Yet it’s she who is the poster child for corporate malfeasance. While as director of the firm, Mr. Bush neglected to inform the SEC about his inside trades, as required, for eight months. And then blamed the SEC and Harken lawyers for the mess.

The investigation of 1991 conducted by the SEC didn’t seem to have the same kind of zeal that the pursuit of Martha did. Perhaps being the son of the sitting President of the day, held some sway in the investigative offices at the time. Regardless, the net result of the investigation such as it was, would be no harm no foul; there would be no fine, no jail time, no black mark on a record. Case closed on to other things. Despite the apparent smoking gun of an internal memo; warning of the perils of insider trading, which only came to light later on. There would be no second look, the decision would stand; it would be handshakes all around. The Investigation closed, reputation intact, it would be off to a political career in Texas and Washington.

Fast forward now thirteen years, the second Bush administration watches as the corporate elites of America get entwined in scandal after scandal. Daily reports of greed, corporate stock manipulation and small investors ruined by the machinations of the stock market rule the day. The administration issues a call for better corporate accountability, a renewal of faith in the course of business.

Caught up in the glare of that spotlight is Martha, held up as a symbol of all that has gone wrong. As she faces her justice, she can console herself with the thought that she probably is not alone. As Conason points out in his finishing comments in his article, “Now George W. Bush is President, promising a new era of corporate responsibility symbolized by the Martha Stewart ruin. Such is justice in the age of irony.”

Martha needed this guy on her defence team; he has succinctly explained the double standard in place. Any appeal should include copies of the article, for it points out one sadly cynical truth about justice. It’s not whether you’re guilty or not, but rather whether you have friends in place to get you off. It would seem Martha did not.