Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana Undermines His Ethics Reforms
On February 10, 2008, Bobby Jindal, the newly elected governor of
Louisiana, said in <a href="http://www.gov.louisiana.gov/index.cfm?md=newsroom&tmp=detail&catID=3&a…; target="”_blank”">a
big speech</a>:<ul>
Today, we take the first step towards building a better Louisiana where
our ethics laws are the gold standard - letting the rest of the world
know that corruption will no longer find a home here. The actions that
we will take over the coming days will have a lasting impact on
generations to come and help erase Louisiana’s image created by
generations past. There is no room for failure. We must be bold.
Instead of incremental change, we must make sweeping change. Instead of
leaving any doubt about our commitment, we must wipe the slate clean.</ul>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/us/politics/03jindal.html" target="”_blank”">A
New York <i>Times</i> front page article today</a> focuses on <a href="http://jindalfoundation.org/" target="”_blank”">a foundation</a>
started that same year by Jindal's wife, which accepts huge gifts from
companies doing business with the state of Louisiana. I have criticized
Jindal's take on ethics before (<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/371" target="”_blank”">1</a>, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/767" target="”_blank”">2</a>), but this time it
appears that he has no real understanding of government ethics, or feels it does not apply to him.<br>
<br>
The <i>Times</i> understands the issue, portraying such foundations as
"mutually beneficial: companies seeking to influence politicians or
curry favor can donate unrestricted amounts of money, while the
officials benefit from the good will associated with charitable work
financed by businesses."<br>
<br>
The founding director of a local environmental group, quoted in the
article, also understands the issue: “It may be a good cause, but it
creates the appearance he is being bribed. And if you are truly
committed to ethical behavior, you just need to stay away from it all
together.”<br>
<br>
But Jindal's press secretary seemed to try to set back the
understanding of government ethics in Louisiana to before Jindal took
office. She said that any suggestion that the foundation is a way to
lobby the governor or thank him for a past action is ridiculous. “It is
a completely nonpolitical, nonpartisan organization created by the
first lady, who as an engineer and the mother of three children, has a
passion for helping our young people learn science and math. Anything
other than this reality has plainly been dreamed up by partisan hacks
living in a fantasy land.”<br>
<br>
Has Jindal's press secretary ever heard of the term "appearance of
impropriety"? People who see this foundation as a way to get around
contribution limits and make big players in the state pay to play
aren't "partisan hacks." They're ordinary people who have seen
charitable organizations used like this by thousands of politicians
nationwide.<br>
<br>
Jindal does not appear to realize that a leader's role in government ethics is not just
tooting his own horn. It is educating government officials, and
the public, about how to responsibly handle conflicts, and how not to
create appearances of impropriety. An important way to do this is
through setting an example. If you create appearances of impropriety
and blame them on the opposition party, you undermine everything else
you say about government ethics.<br>
<br>
Today, Jindal's ethics reforms, not all of which were good to begin
with, have effectively collapsed. Government officials throughout the
state are winking. They know now, if they didn't already know, that
ethics reform was a way for the young governor to look good. This is
effectively what he is saying by failing to recognize, or even
acknowledge, that the foundation is extremely irresponsible and
damaging to government ethics in his state, no matter how good it is for students.<br>
<br>
Can Jindal say that no one other than a member of his household could have
started this foundation, and that it could not have been a success
without taking contributions from companies doing business with the
state? If someone else could have done it, she should have. If those
contributions were necessary, then there clearly was insufficient
support for the idea.<br>
<br>
As Melanie Sloan, the executive director of <a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/" target="”_blank”">Citizens for Responsibility
and Ethics in Washington (CREW)</a>, is quoted as saying, “Foundations tied to
politicians see their donations dry up when the politician is no longer
in power. That demonstrates the real reason the charities get the
donations is their political position, not because of the good works
they do.” <br>
<br>
I hope Jindal will use this occasion to take responsibility for the serious conflict situation he and his wife created, and truly educate his state in
government ethics. If not, it will become clear what ethics reform
actually meant to him and how little understanding, or care, he had for
what he said he was trying to accomplish.<br>
<br>
You can find <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/49891428/Jindal-Foundation-Investigation-CREW…; target="”_blank”">CREW's investigation report on the Jindal Foundation here</a>.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---