Two days ago, Gov. Eliot Spitzer, D-N.Y., apologized to the
public after he was caught on a federal wiretap discussing meeting and paying a
prostitute in a hotel in our nation?s capital. He said he had betrayed the
trust of his family and the public, even though he refused to address the
scandal itself. He abruptly left the stage after refusing to take any
questions.

This, the latest episode in a series of scandals involving
politicians and people of high ranking, raises many questions ? the most
pressing of which is, should a person resign when caught committing an act
contrary to his message or stated beliefs? In Mr. Spitzer?s case, the answer is
quite simple: Yes. Not only did he betray the trust of the public, but he also
broke both state and federal law, namely the Mann Act, a century-old act
prohibiting the interstate trafficking of women for ?immoral purposes.?

Yet a variation of the question persists: Had Mr. Spitzer
not broken the law, should he still resign from office simply because he broke
the people?s trust in him? Some might say that since this betrayal has no
effect on the governor?s ability to perform his job, he should not resign.

But Mr. Spitzer did run on the platform of his success as a
crime-fighting attorney general who prosecuted the mob, corporate corruption
and yes, prostitution rings. The platform that the electorate chose him on
turned out to be filled with lies. He must resign.

Mr. Spitzer?s situation is not a unique one, though. Most of
us can still remember Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, who was caught in a police
sting in the Minneapolis airport. And even though he pleaded guilty and failed
to have his plea overthrown, he went back and forth on whether or not he would
resign. In the end, he decided to serve the full length of his term. Now, had
Mr. Craig ran as a homosexual and been elected, there would be no need for him
to resign. However, since he betrayed the public?s trust and lied during his
campaign, he should have owned up to his actions and resigned with dignity,
instead of staying in office with shame.

In the last 10 years, at least nine prominent politicians
have been caught up in sex scandals, and only three resigned from office.
Without exception, these politicians ran as honorable and truthful leaders,
only to be later exposed as liars and hypocrites. They gave numerous excuses
and lengthy apologies, but were rarely brave enough to man up and step down.

There are those who call for complete separation between the
private lives of politicians and their careers. They say a politician should be
judged by his record, not by his personality or personal affairs. At best, this
is an oversimplification of a complex issue.

Politicians are leaders who represent their constituencies
and should therefore be the best representatives in every aspect of their
lives. The nature of politics blurs the line between what is private and
public, and a higher standard should be upheld in both realms.

Furthermore, politicians are not the only outlets of higher
scrutiny when they betray the public?s trust. Prominent civil rights activists,
religious figures and athletes have their share of these scandals, and even
after they apologize and disappear from the public spotlight, the damage they
inflict is largely irreparable.

In situations like Mr. Spitzer?s, it is imperative we make
the distinction between the person and the establishment he or she belongs to.
Just because politicians are caught doing something that contradicts the
message of the party does not mean the party itself is hypocritical. The person
alone should bear the burden of his actions and should be brave enough to bear
the results of his actions. If a public leader cannot do this, he no longer
deserves to lead.

?

Ammar Al Marzouqi ([email protected]) is a
freshman majoring in computer engineering.