ackface-visibility: hidden; box-sizing: border-box; outline: none; position: relative; border: 0px; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; margin: 0px; padding: 5px 0px; vertical-align: baseline; letter-spacing: 0.036px;">Although costs vary, and systemic corruption can coexist with strong economic performance, experience suggests that corruption is a bad development, and democracy is not a cure - anything against corruption. In some cases, history has shown that corruption makes corruption worse. According to Holmes (2006), corruption cases in a number of established democracies have led to the collapse of governments. Large public sectors risk provoking political corruption and, in the case of the United States, aggravating it (Holmes, 2006). Sources: 2, 3, 9, 16

During Suharto's rule, government corruption was highly centralized at the national level, and the costs associated with corruption were predictable. Most recently, in late 2009, President Bingu wa Mutharika announced the establishment of the country's Anti-Corruption Bureau, which was created in response to allegations of corruption in the public sector, the private sector and other sectors. Sources: 6, 8

Many people believe that larger governments tend to be more corrupt, and indeed, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, the government's ability to enact corporate charters and support infrastructure improvements seems likely to have led to a rise in public corruption. Sources: 1

While other rich Western countries have done decent work to bring corruption under control, the US is still a political democracy, a rough and dynamic one, even if it has undertaken significant reforms of good governance. Indeed, many corrupt countries today have tough anti-corruption laws, but it rarely seems to do much good - most governments still get low marks for controlling corruption. While the impact on corruption in national governments has not been thoroughly studied, most studies have examined the impact of government corruption on the economy and public confidence in state institutions. Countries with more corrupt governments, such as the United States and Germany, are no less corrupt than others; and even countries that consider corruption imperfect have exposed particularly corrupt governments and industries and initiated reforms. Sources: 0, 1, 3, 17

In many countries, corruption is said to have behaved and reported in a way that shielded the central government from blame, but in many others it has not. Sources: 3

In addition to the risk of corruption that Britain faces abroad, it reinforces the notion that politicians and big business are only self-interested and cannot be trusted. Even the perception of corruption is dangerous, because it undermines public confidence in the government - a phenomenon that has helped fuel the world's democratic crisis. Sources: 7, 11

When senior officials and political leaders use public office for private purposes, the motivation to be honest is weakened, as is the public's ability to resist corruption. There is no way to punish politicians for their corruption without resorting to criminal punishments such as prison sentences, fines and prison sentences. Governments, donors, and project owners should operate a system in which organizations convicted of corruption are barred from awarding funds or contracts for a certain period of time.