Being too tough
Text 
No Comments [ Add Comment ]<
em>"The generality of men are naturally apt to be swayed by fear rather than reverence, and to refrain from evil rather because of the punishment that it brings than because of its own foulness."
-- Aristotle (384-322 B.C.)
The Greek philosopher was right: Fear of punishment is a strong motivator to follow the rules. But going overboard can produce the opposite: The fear becomes so great, the perpetrator will never admit their wrongdoing.
This is the conundrum facing the Legislature's Political Subdivisions Interim Subcommittee as it attempts to enforce honesty and openness on political candidates. Specifically, members of the interim subcommittee want to make sure candidates file accurate campaign-finance reports, and that those running for office do not abuse the generous ability to amend errors in those reports after the fact. The allegation, not without merit, is that candidates sometimes file a report, then go back later, essentially when no one's looking, and correct so-called "mistakes" -- donors' names and/or amounts -- they might have wanted to keep hidden away for as long as possible.
Bountiful's Rep. Sheryl Allen is fed up with the practice, and she's advocating some tough penalties. Allen's proposal: If a candidate initially misreported a donation, he or she would have to pay up to 5 percent of the difference, or a minimum of $25. If the candidate neglected to include a donation altogether, the same 5 percent/$25 minimum would apply.
Depending on the amount of the donation, the fine could be large or small. The problem is, what if there was no malicious intent? We understand that would be next to impossible to determine, but it remains a valid question.
The other part of Allen's proposal we're uncomfortable with is the one that inflicts the same 5 percent/$25 minimum penalty on a donation if the candidate's report misspells the name of the donor. If it's the wrong name, OK. But simply misspelled? That's going too far.
As some political insiders have already pointed out, this will motivate some candidates to let an error-filled report stand. They won't make amendments, and the mistakes may never be discovered. In that case, the penalties would make the situation worse by removing more accurate information from voters and government watchdogs.
We're not against punishment for manipulation of campaign-spending reports. They should be precise and submitted on time.
But punishment for violations should be measured and applied so they encourage conformity and precision.
Add Your Comment
