Ways to Prevent or Slow Down Ethics Reform

I am always fascinated at the ways in which even the most reform-minded politicians can kill ethics reform proposals that might cause them some embarrassment. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has done a great deal for ethics reform, but at least one reform bill, which on its face seems pretty minor, has apparently gotten in his craw.

According to an article in yesterday's Baton Rouge Advocate, the bill would have required the governor and other statewide elected officials to disclose the campaign contributions of those they appoint to government positions. A similar bill was passed last year without a single vote against it, but it was vetoed by the governor on account of a drafting error. While vetoing the bill, the governor apparently called it "true transparency."

On Wednesday, after the governor's intervention, the bill was amended to exclude the governor and statewide elected officials from having to report anything, leaving it up to the appointees themselves (it seems unreasonable to spread the responsibility around like this). And then the seriously watered-down bill was itself voted down.

But at least there is a legislative trail to follow. Most ethics reform bills slowly go from committee to committee, so that they don't manage to get to the floor before the session is over. This allows elected officials to vote in favor of ethics reform in committee, without the reform ever becoming law. In such instances, the legislative trail is meaningless, and the failure to pass reform can be blamed on higher priorities (nearly always economic), the need for serious deliberation, and short legislative sessions.

Another popular way to put off ethics reform is set up task forces to research it. They take a couple years to make recommendations, and then the legislative process slowly ignores the recommendations or waters them down before passing them. If the task force consists of former legislators and the like, the recommendations are usually very limited, allowing the legislature or council to be seen as accepting the reforms whole hog, with necessary changes made by legislative counsel.

In a poor ethics environment, often only very knowledgeable and committed good government or other sorts of citizen groups can intervene successfully in such a process to make ethics reform more than a few minor changes that do nothing to change business as usual.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---