You are here
In Ethics Enforcement, the Criminal Process Can Be Even Less Effective Than the Ballot Box
Friday, November 19th, 2010
Robert Wechsler
There are three basic approaches to enforcing ethics laws:
through ethics commissions, through the criminal process, and through
the ballot box. I strongly oppose using the criminal process for ethics
violations (see an
earlier blog post), and feel that the ballot box is far too crude a
way to enforce ethics laws, especially considering that voters do not
have the facts or know the laws.
A situation in Santa Clara County (CA) shows that the criminal process can actually be even less effective than the ballot box.
According to an article in yesterday's San Jose Mercury News neighborhoods section, a member of a school district board of trustees was charged with five felony and four misdemeanor counts of conflict of interest in June, and didn't even plead until yesterday (not guilty, of course). A preliminary hearing was scheduled for mid-January.
The whole thing began with a grand jury report in June 2009, then a district attorney office investigation. All this to show that the trustee voted on contracts to a company for which his company acts as a subcontractor, and failed to disclose the conflict. This is criminal territory, where things move very slowly and expensively, and require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Meanwhile, the trustee arrogantly remained in office while successfully seeking continuances in the criminal case and denying what he had done. With his term up this fall, however, he chose not to run himself. Instead, his wife ran, and she came in last, a result that most likely expressed the public's view that it didn't like what the trustee did or his arrogance in staying on and adding insult to injury by not admitting what he had done.
Thank goodness there are no continuances in politics. But this is a school board election, where there are usually few issues and not much in the way of campaigns. One transgression can mean the difference, when the other candidates have a clean record. The one thing that is required is a press that covers the matter well or a party that makes a big deal out of the conflict.
In council and mayoral elections, however, a denied conflict often does not lead to the official's rejection by voters. Look at how easily Rep. Rangel was re-elected. And most officials aren't elected anyway. The ballot box is a crude way to enforce ethics laws, but the criminal process is also ineffective.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
A situation in Santa Clara County (CA) shows that the criminal process can actually be even less effective than the ballot box.
According to an article in yesterday's San Jose Mercury News neighborhoods section, a member of a school district board of trustees was charged with five felony and four misdemeanor counts of conflict of interest in June, and didn't even plead until yesterday (not guilty, of course). A preliminary hearing was scheduled for mid-January.
The whole thing began with a grand jury report in June 2009, then a district attorney office investigation. All this to show that the trustee voted on contracts to a company for which his company acts as a subcontractor, and failed to disclose the conflict. This is criminal territory, where things move very slowly and expensively, and require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Meanwhile, the trustee arrogantly remained in office while successfully seeking continuances in the criminal case and denying what he had done. With his term up this fall, however, he chose not to run himself. Instead, his wife ran, and she came in last, a result that most likely expressed the public's view that it didn't like what the trustee did or his arrogance in staying on and adding insult to injury by not admitting what he had done.
Thank goodness there are no continuances in politics. But this is a school board election, where there are usually few issues and not much in the way of campaigns. One transgression can mean the difference, when the other candidates have a clean record. The one thing that is required is a press that covers the matter well or a party that makes a big deal out of the conflict.
In council and mayoral elections, however, a denied conflict often does not lead to the official's rejection by voters. Look at how easily Rep. Rangel was re-elected. And most officials aren't elected anyway. The ballot box is a crude way to enforce ethics laws, but the criminal process is also ineffective.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
