issue43 BHN

bhnUID: 2177959

43"To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."
2:00—3：29
When the election is coming, people often argue to vote different. Different have different views of the standards of an effective leader.  Although people concerning more about the ability of candidate, however,  I think that we should consider the ethical and moral standard first, then, the ability of candidates.

Maintaining qualified ethical and moral standards is the threshold() standard to valuing candidates. When we choosing public officials, we hope they could  solve existing problems and lead us to bright future. Qualified ethical and moral standards are the assurance of that aim. What is qualified ethical and moral standards? I define it like this: maintaining qualified ethical and moral standards, a public official considers the interest of public when doing any thing; he could not cheat to the public, he cannot misuse authority; he could not do anything against morality. we cannot believe candidates not qualified this standards could make great contribution to the public.  When former president Nixon was disclosed to cheat in the election(), he could no longer win the credit of  public, no matter how strong his ability is. therefore, when considering if a candidate should be voted for, check his if he maintains qualified ethical and moral standards.

Although  maintaining qualified ethical and moral standards is indispensable(), the  highest ethical and moral standards are not always necessarily. Admittedly, the higher ethical and moral standards of candidates are, the more public interest could be insured. Those with high ethical and moral standards also could easily win the trust of the public and further make the policy conducted more smoothly. But we do not need every officials to be charitarian, to be those who try their best  to help the poor voluntarily, we only need they could perform their duty legally and bring more benefits to the public.  Overemphasizing  on ethical and moral standards might bring out negative consequence. If we consider that a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards, candidates might do more to show that the are the highest in ethical and moral standards rather than thinking of the problem needing solving of the society or the district such as drugs, education, poverty(). It seems that a man clean the streets for the districts voluntarily is higher in ethical and moral standards that a public official working at office. Is that man more likely to be an effective leader? Or we should ask the public official do the same thing as that man?


It is not enough for candidates to be just  qualified in ethical and moral standards, they should also maintain the different kinds of other ability to deal complex problems. As a effective leader, he must knows() the trend of development and be capable of foreseeing the future. He must have his own opinion and the effective way to  solve of the problem existing. Officials only maintaining qualified ethical and moral standards without the ability mention above could not be an effective leader, because although they have the intent to making contributions to the public, they do not know the proper way to realize() that aim. For example, a mayor want to improve the education  of that city, but he do not know if he should make best of the current money, paying more for the teacher, building more schools or introduce new methods of education. After all , the ability of a leader is the direct factor affecting the achievement of his work.

In sum, Of all the factors that makes an effective leader,  qualified ethical and moral standards are the fundamental one ;  talent and ability are direct ones  while the highest ethical and moral standards are not necessary for every leader. .

asong2004UID: 2178054

Different have different views of the standards of an effective leader.  Although people concerning more about the ability of candidate,（觉得这前后矛盾了点，或者说不太恰当） however,  I think that we should consider the ethical and moral standard first, then, the ability of candidates.

Qualified ethical and moral standards are the assurance of that aim.后面的论据说明这一点吗


Although  maintaining qualified ethical and moral standards is indispensable(), the  highest ethical and moral standards are not always necessarily. Admittedly, the higher ethical and moral standards of candidates are, the more public interest could be insured. （这段的转折和让步看的有点晕，比较矛盾的说）Those with high ethical and moral standards also could easily win the trust of the public and further make the policy conducted more smoothly. But we do not need every officials to be charitarian, to be those who try their best  to help the poor voluntarily, we only need they could perform their duty legally and bring more benefits to the public.  Overemphasizing  on ethical and moral standards might bring out negative consequence. If we consider that a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards, candidates might do more to show that the are the highest in ethical and moral standards rather than thinking of the problem needing solving of the society or the district such as drugs, education, poverty(). It seems that a man clean the streets for the districts voluntarily is higher in ethical and moral standards that a public official working at office. Is that man more likely to be an effective leader? Or we should ask the public official do the same thing as that man?

It is not enough for candidates to be just  qualified in ethical and moral standards, they should also maintain the different kinds of other ability to deal complex problems.（ｗｈｙ？可以加些句子解释下，比如人品可以怎样而才干又能怎样，分析一下。现在的感觉有点突兀）