Ethical baby steps
Text 
No comments [ Add Comment ]T
his ought to be instructional.
The Utah House of Representatives took a baby step toward more-ethical politics on Monday, but the question remains: Will the Senate follow suit?
If history is any indicator, some senators will huff and puff about there being no need for tighter ethics rules because nobody has proved gifts and meals have influenced votes. In other words, the same bogus arguments they always make -- the arguments that allow them to continue receiving the goodies. And then they'll vote against further reforms.
The measure, House Bill 178, "Regulation of Lobbyists and Gifts," was sponsored by Rep. Ralph Becker, a Salt Lake City Democrat with a history of promoting higher ethics at the Capitol. The original version of his bill called for a ban on any gift over $5 in value.
But a majority of lawmakers in the House -- Republicans, for the most part -- didn't like that. So Rep. Brad Dee, R-Washington Terrace, offered an amendment to require reporting of all gifts in excess of $5, but to let lawmakers accept meals up to $50 without their names ever being attached in lobbyists' spending reports. That change made it appealing to all, and the bill passed by a unanimous vote.
This sort of greasy manipulation of rules over who gets what and obscuring identities of lawmakers who belly up to the breakfast, lunch and supper table does nothing to enhance the reputations of our elected leaders. Their dogged efforts to maintain the free meals, and their own anonymity, is precisely what leads other Utahns to wonder how much legislators must crave the truly expensive gifts. Talk about begging people not to trust you.
Now the bill is in the Senate, which may debate an ethics bill of its own filed Wednesday by Sen. Sheldon Killpack, R-Syracuse. Senate Bill 246 would tighten financial-disclosure rules -- once each year by lawmakers, quarterly for lobbyists -- and match HB 178's effort to put a name to all lawmakers who accept gifts of $5 or more.
As we noted previously, the Senate has a much worse record when it comes to considering ethics reform. Its rule of thumb has always been: We don't need ethics reform because there isn't an ethics problem -- and, furthermore, it's an insult to even present these bills for consideration.
Then again, who knows? This year may actually see a Senate majority emerge and agree to the House's modest improvement over existing ethics laws. From a lawmaker's perspective, it doesn't ban gifts, but only requires they be reported over $5 (which will include all those Jazz games and rounds of golf, finally). And lawmakers will still be able to snarf down those $49.99 meals without fear of being identified on a lobbyist report.
In other words, those who want to can still take the freebies. The only difference will be that their name turns up more often on the reports. It's not enough progress, but it is progress -- and maybe next year we can gain a little more ground toward a complete ban or, absent that, a requirement that everything be reported.
