Why Do Election Law Professionals Discuss the Latest Developments So Much More Than Government Ethics Professionals?
There is an intriguing <a href="http://electionlawblog.org/archives/016575.html" target="”_blank”">blog post on
Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog</a> this morning, entitled, Is
Reading a Legal Blog in One's Field Now Part of the Due Diligence of
Lawyers?<br>
<br>
This is not the wishful thinking of a blogger, but rather a response to
the following passage in the 11th Circuit's <a href="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/201013211.pdf" target="”_blank”">Scott
v. Roberts public campaign financing decision</a> this week:<ul>
McCollum should have known that the excess spending subsidy was
vulnerable to legal challenge. On the day that the Supreme Court
decided Davis, a leading scholar of election law wrote that the
decision "calls all [asymmetrical] provisions in public financing
systems into question." Rick Hasen, <i>Initial Thoughts on FEC v.
Davis: The Court Primes the Pump for Striking Down Corporate and Union
Campaign Spending Limits and Blows a Hole in Effective Public Financing
Plans</i>, Election Law Blog (June 26, 2008, 7:55 AM),
http://electionlawblog.org/archives/011095.html. ...</ul>
The court goes on to refer to two recent decisions from two other
circuits, but it is fascinating that the court referenced a blog post
at all.<br>
<br>
In my other role, as administrator of New Haven's public financing
program, the Democracy Fund, I did read the Davis decision and the blog
post. I agreed with the blog post, and reported to my board about the
possible implications of the Davis decision. I doubt that there are
many attorneys or others who practice in the field of election law who
do not regularly read the Election Law Blog. It would be highly
irresponsible not to.<br>
<br>
Which brings me to the City Ethics blog. Very few private or government
attorneys who do not practice full-time in local government ethics read
this blog on a regular basis. And there are very few private or
government attorneys who do practice full-time in local government
ethics. That is one of the biggest problems in the field: there
are very few people who feel any due diligence to keep up with the
latest developments in, or even truly understand, local government
ethics. And yet there are thousands of attorneys who practice regularly
in the field, and who portray themselves as government ethics experts,
especially by giving advice to local officials.<br>
<br>
The election law field also has a very active private listserv that
debates major new decisions and other developments in election law. As
far as I know, government ethics has no such listserv. The only time
new developments are discussed is at annual <a href="http://cogel.org//" target="”_blank”">COGEL</a> conferences, which few local
government ethics professionals can afford to attend.<br>
<br>
Even at COGEL conferences, major new developments, such as the new
trend in court decisions on legislative immunity in a government ethics
context, often go without any mention. In fact, I applied to head a
panel on legislative immunity at the 2009 and 2010 COGEL conferences,
and both times my application was rejected.<br>
<br>
A few practitioners in government ethics who are members of COGEL do
discuss the most practical issues of government ethics on a private and
sadly rather moribund COGEL forum, but they lack the due diligence of
election law practitioners and academics to discuss new case law, EC
decisions and advisory opinions, and other matters that do not involve
immediate issues they are dealing with themselves. And there is almost
no input from academics, who usually bring a broader perspective to
legal issues.<br>
<br>
The City Ethics blog could be a place to have such a discussion, but
there has not been any interest. I made a feeble attempt to start a
private forum, to see if the public nature of a blog was the problem,
but there appeared to be very little interest in that, as well. And no
academics, such as Rick Hasen with his Election Law Blog, have taken
the initiative.<br>
<br>
Election law has many more conferences, apparently because its practitioners can afford to attend. This inability to meet in person is all the more reason government ethics professionals should make use of free, and far less time-consuming online opportunities for discussion.<br>
<br>
I have my feet in both the local government election law and local
government ethics fields, so the contrast is stark to me. But I don't
know why. The usual excuse, lack of time, applies to both fields. I'd love to hear
people's thoughts on why our field is so different from election law,
either via comments to this blog post, or privately via e-mail.<br>
<br>
If only I could ask the question on the election law listserve. I would
get several responses the very same day.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---