The states are far ahead of Congress in establishing independent ethics
enforcement for legislators according to a study released today by the
U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG). The report, Honest Enforcement: What Congress Can Learn From Independent State Ethics Commissions,
found that twenty-three states have created commissions, boards or
offices that operate largely free of partisan interference to oversee
the ethics rules that apply to elected officials.
Responding
to widespread voter concern about corruption in Congress, the House and
Senate passed strong new restrictions on gifts and travel paid for by
lobbyists in the first weeks of the new Congress. “It’s an encouraging
first step, but the new rules will only be as effective as the will to
enforce them,” said Gary Kalman, Democracy Advocate with U.S. PIRG.
The
report separated out states that allow legislators to review complaints
and decide whether to investigate allegations against their
colleagues. Those state bodies were not determined to be independent.
“Under
these basic criteria, Congress would not even make the cut,” noted
Kalman. “In contrast to these states, Congress currently relies on
self-policing. Conflict of interest rules are optional and ethics
committee members can and have been removed because they dared to
enforce the rules against a powerful colleague.”
The report also
reviewed oversight procedures in the private sector and found that
public businesses and professional licensing boards incorporate many of
the conflict of interest elements favored by independent ethics
commissions. “Congress is almost alone in choosing to police itself,”
concluded Kalman.
In the report, states in which a citizen’s
panel is authorized to review complaints and proceed with
investigations were determined to be independent. States were further
divided into four categories by the level of independence. States were
scored by how well they fared under the following criteria:
• whether outside panelists who oversee a professional director and a staff of impartial investigators;
•
if there are clear and mandatory conflict of interest guidelines
limiting service to those who are not covered by the ethics rules or
closely involved in partisan activities;
• if panelists serve set terms and cannot be removed for any reason other than cause;
• if panelists have the power to receive complaints from the general public;
•
if panelists have the ability to launch investigations without
legislative or outside approval and recommend or enforce sanctions
against those who have violated the rules;
• the degree to which there is appropriate disclosure of the panel’s actions.
Speaker
of the House Nancy Pelosi last week appointed a bipartisan task force
to look into revising the ethics enforcement rules in Congress. U.S.
PIRG encourages the special congressional task force on ethics
enforcement to follow the lead of the states and adopt honest
enforcement.
