The Importance of Publicizing Ethics Programs
If the governmental ethics community had a publicity program, the
headline of <a href="http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1181034.html" target="”_blank”">a
front-page article</a> in Tuesday's Kansas City <span>Star </span>would be a call to arms:<br>
<br>
<h1><small>Legislators agree: Ethics laws
are puppies, not pit bulls</small></h1>
<br>
The gist of the article is that, in Missouri and Kansas, the state
ethics commissions are underfunded, the state ethics laws are too weak,
and enforcement is insufficient to act as a deterrent.<br>
<br>
But the real problem here is that the ethics commissions have not
gotten across the fact that enforcement is not the most important role
for an ethics commission. Yes, the article does talk about the better
job that is being done with campaign finance disclosure, at least in
Missouri. But there is nothing about ethics training, or advisory
opinions, or ethical leadership, financial disclosure, or the ethics commissions' role in
ethics reform.<br>
<br>
The ethics commission leadership appears to be at best reactive. We can
only work with what we have, they suggest. And by doing this, they feed
in to the view that since they are funded by legislatures, they are
creatures of the legislatures, afraid to take strong stands.<br>
<br>
Bob Stern, who knows how to promote his Center for Governmental
Studies, is quoted as saying that the tendency is for ethics
commissions to pull punches. “The threat is, ‘If you guys go too far,
we’ll cut your funding,’"<br>
<br>
Many state ethics commissions do fight for additional funding and better ethics
laws. There are two principal reasons why other state ethics commissions don't do this:
establishment commission members, who have no interest in rocking the
boat, and commission staff who either don't feel it's their role to
take initiative in these areas or fear for their jobs and/or the future
of the ethics commission.<br>
<br>
But however conservative one's view of one's role, an ethics commission
has an obligation to publicize the essential elements and values of
government ethics programs. For example, when reporters bring up
enforcement, explain how this is only one function of an ethics
commission, and only one form of deterrence of unethical conduct. When a reporter ignores the rest of an ethics
program, write a letter to the editor or an op-ed piece in response.<br>
<br>
Educating the public is nearly as important as educating government
officials and employees.<br>
<br>
Local government ethics commissions have even fewer resources, but
publicity doesn't have to cost anything but time. Creating an
informative website, cultivating reporters, writing occasional op-ed
pieces and letters to the editor, holding public forums, letting people
know about ethics commission meetings well in advance, all these can
raise the awareness and understanding of government ethics in your
community, and make citizens more likely to support, and maybe even
demand, ethics reforms.<br>
<br>
It's interesting how different the enforcement statistics are for
Missouri and Kansas. Last year, according to the article, Missouri, which can only investigate complaints,
received 197 complaints and levied 44 fines. 80 cases were dismissed as
unsubstantiated.<br>
<br>
Last year, the Kansas ethics commission investigated 32 formal complaints, of
which only 2 came from the public. The others were initiated by the
commission, often based on informal tips. Only 2 fines were levied, and
the bigger of the two, $7,500, was levied against a person who publicly
said he had filed an ethics complaint. Critics say
the public isn’t filing formal complaints due to the commission’s lack
of transparency and its reluctance to punish
violators.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>