You are here
How Not to Educate the Public About Government Ethics
Wednesday, October 27th, 2010
Robert Wechsler
More election-related news. Here are two arguments against an amendment to the Utah constitution
that, if approved by voters on November 2, would establish a partially independent legislative ethics
commission. The arguments are made in an official
ballot
issue publication of the state of Utah.
This is the perfect opportunity for educating the public about government ethics. But these arguments are the opposite of a valuable lesson. They seek to convince the public that government ethics is about honesty and integrity, that ethics cannot be legislated, and that it is up to voters to determine ethical qualities in those they vote for and against. It's as if the only thing the authors of these arguments knew about government ethics was the word "ethics" and they wanted to share their ignorance with other Utah voters.
This is the same old ballot-box argument that is used against every local ethics reform initiative, except that the second speaker takes it a step further, arguing that, somehow, each voter can investigate, try, deliberate, and enforce government ethics laws (not to mention train and advise and give waivers, I suppose), so that no ethics commission is needed.
Sadly, the arguments for the constitutional amendment do not provide a substantially more accurate picture of government ethics.
"Last session, I voted against the constitutional amendment regarding ethics reform and here are a couple of reasons why I believe the public should also vote AGAINST this ballot initiative.
1. First, the only reason this measure is on the ballot is because it was a political reaction to the Ethics Reform petition that was being circulated. This amendment was proposed to counter this initiative, so it would appear the legislature was addressing the voters’ concerns, using “let’s show them we’re doing something” tactics.
2. Passing this initiative will not guarantee your elected official will truly represent you and be honest in their dealings with others and do what’s best for the people.
3. Because a person’s integrity is born from within, we as voters need to do a better job of knowing our candidates before we elect them, so we know we can trust them before they are sworn into an office of public trust.
4. Voting for this ballot initiative will not guarantee checks and balances, accountability, responsibility, or whether or not someone has integrity. Voting for this initiative will not guarantee that those we elect to office of public trust will be ethical and have moral integrity.
This proposal is not in the best interest of the voters of the State of Utah. As you cast your vote regarding this ballot initiative, please remember, ethics and integrity come from within. Use your integrity. Do the right thing and vote NO on this proposal."
Rep. Neil Hansen
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Only citizens who are serious about their responsibilities of discernment and election can ensure their legislature is moral. “Ethics” legislation, topped off by this proposed Independent Commission will not make angels of us all. This will do very little to stop the truly ambitious and evil among us.
Only your vote can do that.
Ever-tightening ethics regulations will set up a convoluted system where groups who fail at the ballot box can promote their political agenda under the guise of ethics complaints. Your elected representatives could have their reputations destroyed on technicalities that are not morally wrong.
Consider, for a moment, the many opportunities citizens have to screen and scrutinize public officials:
• The moment an individual registers as a candidate for political office, he or she enters a glass house for all to inspect;
• Public and media scrutiny during the campaign, driven by public interest;
• Elections;
• Performance in office; and
• Re-Elections.
The current process places you, the citizen, in full control of ethics violations. In fact, you ARE the ethics committee, because YOU decide whether a candidate is allowed to serve. Do not use ethics legislation as a feel-good crutch when the real problem is that too many citizens fail to properly scrutinize candidates before they vote.
There are no short cuts to running a proper democratic republic.
Don’t be fooled. Ethics cannot be legislated. Please vote no on Amendment D."
Chris Buttars, Utah State Senator
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
This is the perfect opportunity for educating the public about government ethics. But these arguments are the opposite of a valuable lesson. They seek to convince the public that government ethics is about honesty and integrity, that ethics cannot be legislated, and that it is up to voters to determine ethical qualities in those they vote for and against. It's as if the only thing the authors of these arguments knew about government ethics was the word "ethics" and they wanted to share their ignorance with other Utah voters.
This is the same old ballot-box argument that is used against every local ethics reform initiative, except that the second speaker takes it a step further, arguing that, somehow, each voter can investigate, try, deliberate, and enforce government ethics laws (not to mention train and advise and give waivers, I suppose), so that no ethics commission is needed.
Sadly, the arguments for the constitutional amendment do not provide a substantially more accurate picture of government ethics.
"Last session, I voted against the constitutional amendment regarding ethics reform and here are a couple of reasons why I believe the public should also vote AGAINST this ballot initiative.
1. First, the only reason this measure is on the ballot is because it was a political reaction to the Ethics Reform petition that was being circulated. This amendment was proposed to counter this initiative, so it would appear the legislature was addressing the voters’ concerns, using “let’s show them we’re doing something” tactics.
2. Passing this initiative will not guarantee your elected official will truly represent you and be honest in their dealings with others and do what’s best for the people.
3. Because a person’s integrity is born from within, we as voters need to do a better job of knowing our candidates before we elect them, so we know we can trust them before they are sworn into an office of public trust.
4. Voting for this ballot initiative will not guarantee checks and balances, accountability, responsibility, or whether or not someone has integrity. Voting for this initiative will not guarantee that those we elect to office of public trust will be ethical and have moral integrity.
This proposal is not in the best interest of the voters of the State of Utah. As you cast your vote regarding this ballot initiative, please remember, ethics and integrity come from within. Use your integrity. Do the right thing and vote NO on this proposal."
Rep. Neil Hansen
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Only citizens who are serious about their responsibilities of discernment and election can ensure their legislature is moral. “Ethics” legislation, topped off by this proposed Independent Commission will not make angels of us all. This will do very little to stop the truly ambitious and evil among us.
Only your vote can do that.
Ever-tightening ethics regulations will set up a convoluted system where groups who fail at the ballot box can promote their political agenda under the guise of ethics complaints. Your elected representatives could have their reputations destroyed on technicalities that are not morally wrong.
Consider, for a moment, the many opportunities citizens have to screen and scrutinize public officials:
• The moment an individual registers as a candidate for political office, he or she enters a glass house for all to inspect;
• Public and media scrutiny during the campaign, driven by public interest;
• Elections;
• Performance in office; and
• Re-Elections.
The current process places you, the citizen, in full control of ethics violations. In fact, you ARE the ethics committee, because YOU decide whether a candidate is allowed to serve. Do not use ethics legislation as a feel-good crutch when the real problem is that too many citizens fail to properly scrutinize candidates before they vote.
There are no short cuts to running a proper democratic republic.
Don’t be fooled. Ethics cannot be legislated. Please vote no on Amendment D."
Chris Buttars, Utah State Senator
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
