Why people risk so much for so little?
By Gregg Wendorf
Advance News Journal
Another elected official in Hidalgo County indicted by the feds, charged with two counts related to bribery and racketeering.
What else is new?
Ten years ago, 2014, a story was published in this newspaper, which carried this lead paragraph: “The FBI and the Texas Rangers are joining hands to fight public corruption in the Rio Grande Valley.”
Based on multiple news stories subsequently published in The Advance over the past decade, citing successful convictions in federal courts, the work fighting public corruption seems to have paid off, despite claims made by some, related to a few of the defendants, that prosecutors are sometimes too heavy handed.
Still, the press releases published after each trial, courtesy of the DOJ, discount that allegation, by laying out what it deems are the “facts related to the case.”
Now, former Edinburg City Councilman Jorge “Coach” Salinas stands accused of working with another elected Edinburg city official (Public Official A, as named in the indictment) to steer city business to a city vendor (listed as Person 1 in the indictment) between June 1, 2019, and March 1, 2020, during the period when Richard Molina was the city’s mayor and a close political ally of Salinas, each supporting the other.
In November 2021, after one term in office, Salinas chose not to run for reelection (Place 1), and Molina lost in a runoff election to current Mayor Ramiro Garza, Jr., who led the way the following March in adopting a new code of ethics for Edinburg’s elected officials, board, and committee members.
“It’s important. People work hard for their money. They need to know their money is in good hands and they are electing people that are going to follow the laws that are in place. I think this code of ethics is going to show that,” said Garza.
In fact, during the first city meeting that Ramiro Garza, Jr. convened in December 2021 as the city’s new mayor, he asked the city council to adopt a full disclosure of any conflict of interest with regard to elected officials and city vendors, which was indeed adopted.
Six years prior, in 2015, a story published in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review labeled Edinburg as “the dirtiest town” in the entire state.
“Texas had 166 convictions, 34 in Hidalgo County alone, with a dozen cases linked to government agencies headquartered in Edinburg, the county seat.”
Meanwhile, former Councilman Jorge “Coach” Salinas remains innocent until proven guilty.
The Allegation
According to the federal indictment unsealed last Friday, Jorge “Coach” Salinas "did knowingly, and corruptly solicit and demand for his own benefit, and the benefit of others, and accepted, and agreed to accept something of value, that is United States currency, from Person 1, intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection with a business, transaction, and series of transactions with the City of Edinburg valued at $5,000 or more.”
In plain English, votes in exchange for dinero. That was Count 1, as part of the indictment.
Count 2 claims that between June 1, 2019, and approximately March 1, 2020, Salinas did knowingly use a cell phone, and wire and electronic communications, with the intent to promote, manage, and facilitate unlawful activity, namely, bribery.
According to the indictment, if convicted, all “property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to such offense, is subject to forfeiture.”
That amount, listed in the indictment, equals approximately $47,235.
On a personal note, Jorge Salinas was with Edinburg CISD for an undetermined amount of time before being (allegedly) terminated circa 2016. Some claim that he resigned in exchange for a pay-out, to avoid expensive litigation on the part of the school district, with the stipulation that he would never re-apply to work again with Edinburg CISD.
Side note: Jorge Salinas was rehired by the same district last year.
Meaning, basically, while on the Edinburg City Council between 2017 and 2021, Salinas didn’t (allegedly) have a full-time job, but he did have a school-district pay-out in hand, allegedly worth approximately $80,000 (unconfirmed through official channels).
Salinas’s attorney of record is Jesus Villalobos.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Scott Hacker set the former councilman’s cash bond at $50,000 after Jorge Salinas entered a plea of not guilty.
Why Accept Bribes?
In Hidalgo County in particular, and the RGV in general, white-collar crime has become almost as common as a hot summer. Or maybe it just seems that way.
Is public corruption more prominent here than in other parts of the country, who knows. But it seems that not a month goes by that another federal indictment isn’t unsealed, putting the name of another elected official, or two, or three, on the front page in a bad light, casting a shadow over the entire region.
Question is, why does anyone who has built a career risk everything, not to mention time in a federal prison, for a relatively small amount of money?
According to at least two studies related to the subject, the answers are complex.
The two studies — “Why Do People Take Bribes? An Exploration of Individual-Level Factors That Motivate Bribery” by Michael Johnston; and “Understanding Corruption: Explaining Why Good People Do Bad Things” by Susan Rose-Ackerman — help spell out some of the reasons (with the help of AI):
Not about the money: While the monetary value might seem small, it’s often not the primary motivator. The bribe might represent access, influence, or a sense of obligation to the briber. Public officials might feel pressured to reciprocate future favors or simply succumb to social norms within corrupt circles.
Perception of risk: Some officials might underestimate the chances of getting caught or believe they can justify their actions through rationalizations like “everyone does it” or “it’s just a small favor.” Additionally, the perceived severity of punishment might not outweigh the immediate perceived gain.
Gradual escalation: Bribery often starts small and escalates over time. Accepting a seemingly harmless $5,000 bribe can create a slippery slope towards larger sums and greater risks. It becomes harder to refuse subsequent offers after having already crossed the ethical line.
Psychological factors: Some officials might have personality traits like impulsivity, narcissism, or a sense of entitlement that make them more susceptible to corrupt behavior. Additionally, financial pressures or personal vulnerabilities can increase the temptation.
Systemic weaknesses: Weak ethical codes, inadequate oversight, and lack of transparency within organizations can create fertile ground for corruption. A culture of impunity, where past offenders face minimal consequences, further emboldens others to engage in similar acts.