Randall Harold Cunningham (“Randy”) was a Vietnam war hero and a Republican Congress member who represented the 50th Congressional District from years 1991 to 2005 (Stern, 2005). Moreover, he held a spot on the House Intelligence Committee, the House Appropriations Committee and the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee (“DAS”). DAS is responsible for making drafts of bills that set appropriations for defense programs (Stern, 2005). On November 28, 2005, in federal court at the age of 64, Randy pled guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion (Archibold, 2006). Randy’s bribery offense involved him taking $2.4 million in bribes from military contractors Mitchell Wade, and others, in exchange for making it easier for them to receive pentagon contracts (Archibold, 2006).
On March 3, 2006, Randy was sentenced to eight years and four months …show more content…
601). For fraud to occur there must be opportunity and motivation. Opportunity means that there are deficient or no internal controls which gives a person an opportunity to commit fraud (Murphy & Dacin, 201, p. 604). This means that one can commit fraud without getting caught and probably would not commit fraud if there were controls. One lack of control involved the DAS and the black budget. Authorization committees are meant to vet earmaks to see if they meet federal priorities (Stewart 2010, p. 928). The DAS is headed by a chair who approves earmarks placed in the bill. Subcomittee members are able to decide where funding goes to in their congressional district (Stern, 2005). However, this process did not work well as Randy intimidated other members for support and it lacked transparency as the bills do not specify which subcommittee members are responsible for specific earmarks (Stern,
On March 3, 2006, Randy was sentenced to eight years and four months …show more content…
601). For fraud to occur there must be opportunity and motivation. Opportunity means that there are deficient or no internal controls which gives a person an opportunity to commit fraud (Murphy & Dacin, 201, p. 604). This means that one can commit fraud without getting caught and probably would not commit fraud if there were controls. One lack of control involved the DAS and the black budget. Authorization committees are meant to vet earmaks to see if they meet federal priorities (Stewart 2010, p. 928). The DAS is headed by a chair who approves earmarks placed in the bill. Subcomittee members are able to decide where funding goes to in their congressional district (Stern, 2005). However, this process did not work well as Randy intimidated other members for support and it lacked transparency as the bills do not specify which subcommittee members are responsible for specific earmarks (Stern,