You are here
The Appearance of Independence and a Monopoly On Advice
Tuesday, July 9th, 2013
Robert Wechsler
Two of the most important elements of a government ethics program
are the appearance (and reality) of independence and a monopoly on
ethics advice and enforcement. The government ethics program that
has jurisdiction over the greatest number of local officials and
employees in the U.S. has problems with respect to both of these elements. And
its commission's selection of a new executive director, after two years without
a formal director, emphasizes both of these problems.
According to an article in the Los Angeles Times last weekend, California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) selected as the director Erin V. Peth, an adviser to the governor. The governor has appointed two of the FPPC's five members (including the chair; the other three members were selected by other statewide officials, and are all new to the FPPC this year). In addition, the FPPC's general counsel worked for the governor when the governor was the state's attorney general. The appearance is that Ms. Peth was the governor's choice for the job, no matter how qualified or how independent she may actually be.
One of the many weaknesses of the state ethics program is that the FPPC does not have a monopoly on ethics advice. In fact, Ms. Peth has provided ethics advice to state officials in her current role as deputy legal affairs secretary, and in the role she had before that, as deputy attorney general. Since she could have told officials to go to the FPPC, it is hard to believe that she will now try to centralize ethics advice in the FPPC, even for state officials.
Ms. Peth certainly seems highly qualified for the position, but I hope that she will deal openly with these two issues before she takes office. She should say what she will do when the governor or certain close associates and appointees are involved in ethics matters. I suggest that she not make the decision herself, but instead seek ethics advice from another state's ethics program.
It is harder for her to deal with the second issue, because this is not for her to decide. But she would certainly have input and would be listened to regarding a monopoly on ethics advice. She should explain why she believes it is best to have numerous people interpreting the state's ethics code, and what are the arguments against this (e.g., forum shopping and inconsistency).
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
According to an article in the Los Angeles Times last weekend, California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) selected as the director Erin V. Peth, an adviser to the governor. The governor has appointed two of the FPPC's five members (including the chair; the other three members were selected by other statewide officials, and are all new to the FPPC this year). In addition, the FPPC's general counsel worked for the governor when the governor was the state's attorney general. The appearance is that Ms. Peth was the governor's choice for the job, no matter how qualified or how independent she may actually be.
One of the many weaknesses of the state ethics program is that the FPPC does not have a monopoly on ethics advice. In fact, Ms. Peth has provided ethics advice to state officials in her current role as deputy legal affairs secretary, and in the role she had before that, as deputy attorney general. Since she could have told officials to go to the FPPC, it is hard to believe that she will now try to centralize ethics advice in the FPPC, even for state officials.
Ms. Peth certainly seems highly qualified for the position, but I hope that she will deal openly with these two issues before she takes office. She should say what she will do when the governor or certain close associates and appointees are involved in ethics matters. I suggest that she not make the decision herself, but instead seek ethics advice from another state's ethics program.
It is harder for her to deal with the second issue, because this is not for her to decide. But she would certainly have input and would be listened to regarding a monopoly on ethics advice. She should explain why she believes it is best to have numerous people interpreting the state's ethics code, and what are the arguments against this (e.g., forum shopping and inconsistency).
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
