Seems others are noticing...

...what I pointed out the other day, about the loss of the rule of law:

No one doubts that the coming election will be the most important referendum on the size and nature of government in a generation. But another issue is nearly as important and has gotten far less attention: our crumbling commitment to the rule of law. ...

A sad irony of these developments is that rule-of-law values have been one of America's greatest contributions to world-wide economic development in recent decades. When the economist Hernando de Soto tried in the 1990s to determine why economic growth is so limited in much of the world, he concluded that respect for basic property rights is essential.

America, where this commitment gradually emerged in the 19th century, was Exhibit A in Mr. de Soto's story. In the years after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, American markets served as a model of the importance of privatization and protection of property rights as the nations of Eastern Europe charted a new economic future. Now we increasingly are the ones that need to learn these lessons.

Rule-of-law matters cannot be separated entirely from questions about the size and role of government. The more government grows, the harder it is to preserve rule-of-law virtues like transparency and clear rules of the game.

It's really a shame the highlighted insight above is buried in the editorial... it's heart of the issue.  Power tends to concentrate (centralization/growth of government), and we all know the adage about power.  It's no wonder, then, we find so many criminals (indicted, convicted, under investigation or needing to be) working in and around our bloated ruling apparatus.

The solution?  Devolution... recalling back from the District of Corruption the authorities that were never meant to reside there in the first place.  It's much easier to hold officials accountable for breaches of the rule of law when they aren't separated from the citizens by hundreds/thousands of miles.