[bluebeard]

I thought this was interesting an relevant to Alabama. Also, if you look at the map, the Mississippi river just seems polluted with corruption! I guess in general, its the deep south, the Appalachians, and the rust belt. Kinda.
What Corrupt States Spend Their Money On

Among the most corrupt states were Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Illinois, South Dakota and Alaska.
The study found that high levels of corruption in a state can shape its budget allocation. More corrupt states tended to spend money on construction, highways, and police protection programs, which provide more opportunity for corrupt officials to use public money for their own gain. These states spend less on health, education, and welfare, which provide less opportunity for officials to collect bribes...

[Reactionary]

From your link:

"Using data from the Department of Justice that encompassed more than 25,000 public corruption-related convictions nationwide between 1976 and 2008 of elected officials, judges and local employees..."

The GOP took over the State legislature in 2010, in large part due to widespread Democratic Party corruption.

The study is also based on a false premise: "These states spend less on health, education, and welfare, which provide less opportunity for officials to collect bribes..."

Most of the Democratic Party corruption was in education and healthcare.

[bluebeard]

Originally Posted by Reactionary

From your link:

"Using data from the Department of Justice that encompassed more than 25,000 public corruption-related convictions nationwide between 1976 and 2008 of elected officials, judges and local employees..."

The GOP took over the State legislature in 2010, in large part due to widespread Democratic Party corruption.

I do not dispute this. I was not blaming the GOP in Alabama. I'm guessing its more common that any one party state will tend to corrupt. Organizations are much more difficult to be watched and reform internally, when there is no external pressure or threat to do so. It will be no different if the Republican party is in power for any amount of time, as we all expect it will.

Originally Posted by Reactionary

The study is also based on a false premise: "These states spend less on health, education, and welfare, which provide less opportunity for officials to collect bribes..."

Most of the Democratic Party corruption was in education and healthcare.

This is disputing what they've posited based on the experience of a single state's recent experience. I'm not versed in this research area, but they didn't completely make this idea up. From the original article this story is reporting about:

Corrupt public offi cials are likely to spend public resources on
items for which it is easier to levy larger bribes. Mauro (1998) finds
evidence that the share of expenditures on education is lower in more
corrupt countries. Expenditures on education do not provide as many
“lucrative” opportunities for corrupt offi cials as other components of
spending (Baraldi 2008; Mauro 1998). Shleifer and Vishny (1993)
argue that the illegal nature of corruption demands secrecy. Th e
nature of secrecy shifts a country’s investments away from projects
in health and education into those in defense and infrastructure if
these off er better opportunities for corruption. Gupta, Davoodi, and
Alonso-Terme (1998) show empirically that corruption is associated
with higher military spending as a share of GDP and total government
expenditure. Delavallade (2006) shows that corruption reduces
the share of social expenditures, such as education, health, and social
protection, in total spending. In contrast, public offi cials’ corruption
tends to increase the share of government spending on public services
and order, energy, culture, housing, and defense. Hessami (2010)
shows mathematically that corruption is less likely to prevail when
transaction costs associated with concealing corruption and/or the
degree of competitiveness among bribe givers is high...

Summary of results. Tables 7–10 present the system GMM
estimates of all state categorical expenditures.13 States with higher
levels of corruption are likely to favor capital, construction,
highways, total salaries and wages, borrowing, correction, and police
protection, at the expense of social sectors such as total education,
elementary and secondary education, health, and hospitals.

Capital, construction, and highways. In cross-national analyses,
the construction industry is consistently ranked as one of the most
corrupt industries. Kenny (2007) explains why corruption prevails
in this industry. First, construction involves large, complex,
nonstandard activities, so the quality of construction can be very
hard to assess. Second, domestic and international construction
industries are dominated by a few monopolistic fi rms. Third, the
industry is closely linked to the government. Governments have
major roles as “clients, regulators, and owners” of construction
companies. It is very common to bribe government offi cials to gain
or alter contracts and to circumvent regulations related to
construction (Kenny 2007).

Note that they are citing previous literature, and then reporting their own findings from a national data, not just stating on anecdotal evidence as you just have. This is not something that was just made up. Just as non-smokers can get lung cancer, its possible to have corruption in all sectors. Its just that construction tends to be easier, apparently.

In addition, while the Democrats were in power in Alabama, I wouldn't exactly say that social services funding was high.

[White Wine]

Originally Posted by bluebeard

I thought this was interesting an relevant to Alabama. Also, if you look at the map, the Mississippi river just seems polluted with corruption! I guess in general, its the deep south, the Appalachians, and the rust belt. Kinda.
What Corrupt States Spend Their Money On

Nobody is more corrupt than the urban Northeast, except for Chicago/Illinois. The only reason you don't hear about more convictions in these places is because they bribe the judges and intimidate witnesses and juries. You hear about people going to prison more often in the southern states because these idiots don't know how to not get caught.

[bluebeard]

Originally Posted by White Wine

Nobody is more corrupt than the urban Northeast, except for Chicago/Illinois. The only reason you don't hear about more convictions in these places is because they bribe the judges and intimidate witnesses and juries. You hear about people going to prison more often in the southern states because these idiots don't know how to not get caught.

I'm not immediately dismissing this... but I'm extremely skeptical. What makes you believe this?