Welcome to The Senate Site

In the Daily Herald, emphasis is ours:

It's time for Utahns for Ethical Government to withdraw its referendum on legislative ethics reform.

The group's flawed effort had the beneficial effect of pushing the Legislature to pass its own reforms, and the Legislature's plan turned out better.

To be sure, the UEG group is making hay of the scandals bookending the just-ended session: former House majority leader Kevin Garn's hot-tubbing with a teen, as well as Senate leader Sheldon Killpack's DUI arrest before the 2010 session.

Such spin underlines the reality that UEG is a political group, regardless of its rhetoric. These scandals should not distract Utahns from the fact that Garn's past has nothing to do with legislative ethics, and Killpack's misdeed -- a DUI -- is only marginally related.

It's true that the Legislature's ethics review and discipline process needed to be strengthened. The question, however, is how best to address the matter.

UEG made its pitch, but in a politically charged and ill-considered ballot initiative. Since last year it has been doing everything it can to qualify that initiative. Its proposed rules, however, are badly crafted, potentially casting a wide net of suspicion on citizen-lawmakers, while hobbling their ability to defend themselves. It likely would deter good people from running for office, while distracting legislators from their real concerns.

It sets up its own sponsors as "czars" to inject themselves into the process under certain circumstances. And it attempts to dodge some of the checks and balances of our political and legal systems.

In short, in trying to find an ideal solution for a perfect world, the ballot initiative would create a flawed system that would function badly in the real world.

The Legislature has now passed its own package of ethics reform. It is a strong one that meets all reasonable criteria for setting and enforcing ethical standards. The Legislature's plan restricts personal use of campaign funds, reforms the campaign funding process, and tightens conflict-of-interest disclosure.

It also would create an independent ethics panel -- with retired judges in the majority -- selected in a fair and balanced process that includes both major political parties. It includes provisions for alerting the public that an ethics probe is under way without slaughtering reputations prematurely.

Legislators should be held to high standards, but so should ethics complaints. This was achieved in the Legislature's reforms. Lawmakers have managed to take politics largely out of the process, which is quite an accomplishment -- and one that is not shared with the politically charged UEG initiative. The poorly conceived UEG initiative would allow virtually anyone to lob a flurry of charges, valid or not, at a politician in the hope something sticks. That's wrong. Worse, the UEG proposal makes the process exempt from judicial review. That's frightening.

While the Legislature's plan seems too cautious to some critics, we believe its measured approach is best. Rash, sweeping legislation like the UEG initiative often ushers in a host of unforeseen complications.

There is a strong case for the principle that when it comes to lawmaking, the legislative process has many advantages over citizen initiatives. It's a little known secret, closely guarded by UEG, that citizen initiatives are at least as vulnerable to the machinations of special interests as legislative measures -- and maybe more so. Just look at California, where various groups have rammed through a great many "citizen" initiatives. The Golden State is virtually dysfunctional today, partly as a result of citizen mandates.

So, be careful what you wish for.

At least the Utah Legislature's efforts are the product of men and women who have been elected to represent the voters -- and they'll have to face voters again soon. That is the most certain check on ethical transgressions or runaway power available in our republic.

The Utah Legislature, for all its follies, has made a strong move on ethics reforms. The process it created is strong, neutral, respectful and transparent. It should be given a chance.

If UEG manages to get its petition on the ballot, voters would see it alongside the Legislature's request for an independent ethics commission under the state Constitution. Such a ballot collision would only muddy the issue. It raises the specter of both measures passing and bringing on a legal nightmare that might thwart reforms. Here's our suggestion: As an American politician once suggested about the Vietnam War, it is time for UEG to declare victory and get out. The group could plausibly claim that it pushed the Legislature to clean up its act. Reformers could take satisfaction in their efforts, congratulate lawmakers on finally seeing the light, proclaim that their work is done and ride off into the sunset.

4 Comments:

 jbtsax said...

As Paul Harvey would say, "here's the rest of the story. To read the truth about how the legislature's ethics changes compare with the citizen's initiative go to this site.

http://www.utahnsforethicalgovernment.org/pdf/UEGcomparison.1010.pdf

3/20/2010 10:04 PM  

 JBTSBRAIN said...

Paul Harvey wouldn't be caught dead pitching such a clunker of an initiative. He would pinpoint the dysfunction UEG prays you won't notice, and explain to everyone what a boondoggle the initiative really is.

3/20/2010 11:57 PM  

 jbtsax said...

I wonder if the smarta** posting under a variation of my name has even read the Utahns for Ethical Government Initiative or the link I provided comparing that with the legislature's ethics bills passed in the last session.

It is my guess that he/she/it has not.

To intimate that one knows what Paul Harvey would think of the proposed ethics initiative is not only stupid, but impossible because Paul Harvey is DEAD.

It is this type of argument and comment that leads me to question the IQ of those conservatives like Mr. Smarta** who oppose the citizens having a voice in their government through the constitutional right of the initiative process.

Mr. S.A., go read the document see what it says before piping up again and showing how truly ignorant you are.

One more response like that last one and I will be moved to express how I really feel.

3/21/2010 12:43 PM  

 The Senate Site said...

All:

Let's keep the discussion here informed and friendly. Civil dialogue is welcome; personal attacks are not.

3/23/2010 3:08 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Twitter Updates

Follow @UtahSenate on Twitter