2012 Legislature: To restore public trust, pass ethics reform
(Note: My colleague Jay Bookman has his own post on the ethics reform and a brief explanation of our joint project during this legislative session.)
Skepticism is a virtue, as a magazine’s motto once had it, but the thought is incomplete without this corollary: Cynicism is corrosive.
That is particularly true in that realm which makes cynicism oh-so tempting: politics. Adopting a “they’re all crooks” mentality has the perverse effect of giving license to those pols who are crooked, by failing to distinguish them from the others. The best defense against that mentality is a good-government offense, and that’s where a renewed push for wide-ranging reform of state ethics laws comes in.
After a failed attempt in 2010 to cap the value of gifts such as meals from lobbyists to legislators, the issue is coming back up this year. This is the year to see it through.
“At a certain point, things get to the point that when the public sees what’s going on, they question the motives,” said Sen. Joshua McKoon, R-Columbus. “We need to take this issue off the table.”
McKoon and Rep. Tommy Smith, R-Nicholls, plan to sponsor a bill touching on lobbyist gifts and much more. It’s still being drafted, but the basis is the 26-point list of reforms championed by such groups as the Tea Party Patriots, Common Cause Georgia and the League of Women Voters.
That’s an unlikely alliance in some respects. But then, good government shouldn’t be a partisan or ideological issue.
(That said, Georgia Republicans, who have the votes to pass this thing anytime they want, might want to take note: While an impressive 72 percent of registered voters recently told pollsters for the AJC that they favor a limit on lobbyist gifts, the figure was even higher — 82 percent! — among self-identified Republicans.)
Nor should good government be only about naming names from the past. As many readers know, this newspaper has reported lobbyist-funded trips for certain legislative leaders that cost thousands of dollars. That reporting was important. But, going forward, so are these thoughts from McKoon:
“We don’t need to make this about personalities, we don’t even need to make this about what was reported in the past under the current law, because everything that has happened and has been reported is lawful,” McKoon told me Thursday after announcing the ethics push.
“The question that confronts us now is a public policy question. And my position on that question is that if we continue not to have a limit, that it damages this institution [the Legislature]. It damages our ability to be trusted by the public. So the way to show good faith and renew that trust is to pass a law that establishes a limit.”
While it’ll take more than that, as McKoon readily acknowledges, that’s a good starting point. But if he and Smith are to get their colleagues to that starting point, they’ll need the help of Georgians willing to demonstrate with telephones and keyboards that their healthy skepticism hasn’t disintegrated into unhealthy, apathetic cynicism.
—
Note: Again, I recommend Jay’s post on the same topic. And here are contacts for key House and Senate officials on this issue, as listed on the General Assembly’s website:
Senate
Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle: 404-656-5030
Sen. Chip Rogers, R-Woodstock (Majority Leader): 404-463-1378
Sen. John Crosby, R-Tifton (Chair, Ethics Committee): 404-463-5258
Sen. Gloria Butler, D-Stone Mountain (Secretary, Ethics Committee): 404-656-0075
House
Rep. David Ralston, R-Blue Ridge (Speaker of the House): 404-656-5020
Rep. Jan Jones, R-Milton (Speaker Pro Tem): 404-656-5072
Rep. Stacey Abrams, D-Atlanta (House Minority Leader): 404-656-5058
Rep. Joe Wilkinson, R-Sandy Springs (Chair, Ethics Committee): 404-463-8143
—
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
78 comments Add your comment
Dusty
January 13th, 2012
11:51 am
A partisan pep talk from GETALIFE!!
Now that does make me smile!!!
td
January 13th, 2012
11:54 am
JF McNamara
January 13th, 2012
11:40 am
Then I say it is up to you and other like minded individuals in your district to elect a representative that reflects your point of view and will not accept such gifts. This is the responsibility of the voter in that district to inform their representative to the set of ethical standards that you expect. If they do not then they must suffer the consequences of not abiding by your ethical standard.
Kyle Wingfield
January 13th, 2012
11:56 am
Name Withheld: If you know of any bribes, I encourage you to report them to the proper authorities.
Dusty
January 13th, 2012
12:09 pm
Kyle,
Proper authorities? Would that be the ethics committee of fellow legislators, the DA or the police?
I really was not sure. But informers are often rewarded with disgust, loss of job, and disgrace. It takes a special kind of bravery to be an informer in remedial efforts. .Journalists are the ones who usually receive credit for being informers if any honor is given. (Watergate!)
JF McNamara
January 13th, 2012
12:10 pm
td,
The problem is that it isn’t a partisan issue. Generally only the Democrat and Republican (actually Republican) have a realistic chance of winning, and both are parties taking the bribes. My only option is not to vote.
You are relying on free market principles to solve the problem, but it can’t work because two bad actors have a monopoly. Since the monopoly is not likely to be broken, we need rules in place to stop the bribes.
Also, my job requires that I can’t take bribes just like Kyle’s. I’m my lawmakers employer. If I don’t want him taking bribes, he should not be able to. Lawmakers work for me, and therefore I should be able to place rules on them.
td
January 13th, 2012
12:33 pm
JF McNamara
January 13th, 2012
12:10 pm
I agree that it is a bipartisan issue. Primaries are open in Georgia so anyone can vote in either party. If both parties are as you say corrupt then you are going to have to find more like minded people in your district to run someone that has your views on ethics. I id not say it was going to be easy but it works.
Will
January 13th, 2012
12:44 pm
There seems to be a growing belief among a significant number of republican politicians that there is little they could do to lose their super majority in the legislature or their complete domination of state government control. Hence, their lack of concern for significant ethics reform, their support for increased spending in the next state budget and their support for increased borrowing to fund portions of this budget.
And the most disconcerning aspect of this is that they are probably correct. No republican is going to lose his/her seat in the General Assembly over ethics reform. Democrats will unlikely pose a serious threat to the republican dominated state government for the foreseeable future.
I believe we are seeing just the beginning of the long, troubling spiral downward caused by the complete domination of one political party in a state. In other words, we have returned to where we were when democrats controlled the state.
Linda
January 13th, 2012
12:52 pm
Kyle is doing a great job representing the people of Georgia by BEING there, reporting & encouraging us to show interest (& disgust) by getting involved. Thank you, Kyle.
Name Withheld
January 13th, 2012
3:03 pm
Kyle, the kindest thing I can say about your reply is that it is extremely naive. The law only forbids quid-pro-quo bribes, that is, where party A gives a gift to elected official B in exchange for a vote. Only really stupid people do that (e.g., Reginald Eaves.) The culture under the dome is a lot more subtle than that but no less pernicious. It is plainly understood that things of value flow to those who signal their support, usually through underlings, for the wish list of certain industries or businesses. And by “things of value” I mean campaign cash, over or under the table, business opportunities, tickets, booze, meals, even female companionship.
You’ll never stop all of it. But if there was an absolute no-exceptions to accepting gifts, there would be a whole lot less of it. At present, the culture is veering out of control.
Obozonomics
January 13th, 2012
3:04 pm
Gifts from lobbyist a problem, really? The gifts are not the issue, it is the fact that lobbyist are even legal at all…
Name Withheld
January 13th, 2012
3:05 pm
Left out the word “prohibition” after “no-exceptions.”
And by the way, the current dispute over control of the Senate has a lot to do with control over that flow of “things of value.” If you control the Senate, things of value tend to flow your way.
Name Withheld
January 13th, 2012
3:08 pm
@ Obozonomics:
Lobbyists serve a useful purpose. Without lobbyists, legislators would be making decisions based primarily on their own knowlege of complex issues, and which constituent shouts the loudest. Believe me, you don’t want that. Most lobbyists I know would absolutely LOVE to see a complete ban on gifts, since gift-giving favors the “bad” lobbyists.
Obozonomics
January 13th, 2012
3:16 pm
Name Withheld
Sorry I still don’t think lobbying should be legal at all, unless of course everybody is supplied one, otherwise it is big business that runs the government, not the people and that is not what America is supposed to be about…
Name Withheld
January 13th, 2012
3:23 pm
The Constitution guarantees every citizen the right to talk and express his or her opinion (to “petition”) and elected official. You couldn’t outlaw lobbying if you wanted to, and you wouldn’t want to. Legislators don’t work in a vacuum. They need information, and supplying information is the function of a lobbyist. The majority of them are decent, honorable, and truthful people, even many of those that represent not-so-honorable industries (e.g., big tobacco.) The problem isn’t lobbyists, it’s bad lobbyists, and the elected officials who cultivate them.
Kyle Wingfield
January 13th, 2012
3:44 pm
Name Withheld: If it’s not quid pro quo, I don’t call it a “bribe.” Of course there’s influence-peddling going on. If you know of a specific situation that isn’t illegal but still ought to be public knowledge, then tell a reporter…
Kyle Wingfield
January 13th, 2012
3:45 pm
Name Withheld @ 3:08: Ding ding ding! It would also save them some dough…
Kyle Wingfield
January 13th, 2012
3:46 pm
Obozonomics @ 3:16: I can almost guarantee that you do have a lobbyist…or at least someone claiming to speak on behalf of you or a group you belong to.
catlady
January 13th, 2012
4:35 pm
Kyle, I didn’t see anything about repairing the Ethics Commission, which got defunded while hot on the trail of our Governor.
Many of those listed as contacts have serious ethical problems of their own, which should negate them from positions of leadership.
Kyle Wingfield
January 13th, 2012
5:31 pm
catlady: It’s on the TPP/CCG list linked in the column.
Hillbilly D
January 13th, 2012
8:33 pm
How about no meals and gifts? They get a travel and meal allowance when they are in session. If you can’t afford to buy your own meals, can you really afford to be in the Legislature, instead of out working?
1/15: Ethics legislation: Limit dollar distractions | Atlanta Forward
January 14th, 2012
10:34 am
[...] of interest: AJC columnists Jay Bookman and Kyle Wingfield weigh in on the [...]
Get Real
January 14th, 2012
12:09 pm
If you really think that a $100 limit on gifts to legislators will fix anything, think again. Every gift now is fully disclosed. Kyle: Why don’t you just write stories about the gifts you think are inappropriate? Too lazy? Wait, I get it. You get to write what you think and your employer presses it into a paper that’s spread to millions of readers, influencing opinions. A lobbyists gathers with legislators over a meal and you’re not invited. So, you and your media buddies don’t get all the say! There it is. Write one article about a lobbyist gift before you try to squash the speech of those who don’t get their opinion spread across the state everytime they want.
catlady
January 14th, 2012
12:29 pm
EVERY SINGLE VOTER should have the same kind of access to legislators. I, as a poor citizen, should have the same access as the Southern Company. However, I cannot match the money that others have. Therefore, to ensure that everyone has the same chance, NO expenditures should be allowed to “enhance the information” of our legislators. (If they are so incompetent or unable to learn about things on their own, let’s get rid of them in favor of legislators who can do research/reading on their own) Don’t legislators have staffs to assist them?.
Get Real
January 14th, 2012
12:49 pm
Catlady: go to the Capitol and send a page note into your Representative or Senator saying you’re from the district and have a question about an issue, you will have about a 99% chance they will walk out and see you unless there is about to be a vote.
Morning Reads for Saturday, January 14, 2012 the Short Stack edition
January 14th, 2012
12:54 pm
[...] Kyle Wingfield and Jay Bookman have both written columns in support of limiting lobbyist gifts to elected officials. [...]
My 2 cents
January 15th, 2012
8:40 pm
SO, if they can’t pass the limits on contributions how about this: If the lobbyist wants to give cash, lunches, junkets, whatever to a politician they must also give the same to everyone that politician represents. It’s only fair, anything else is rude and inconsiderate.
lawrencevillelions.org » Morning Reads for Saturday, January 14, 2012 the Short Stack edition
January 16th, 2012
2:10 am
[...] Kyle Wingfield and Jay Bookman have both written columns in support of limiting lobbyist gifts to elected officials. [...]
2012 Tuesday: Newt on work, and the scourge of super PACs | Kyle Wingfield
January 17th, 2012
12:34 pm
[...] – At this point, some of you will ask why I take this position on campaign finance while advocating a limit on gifts from lobbyists to our state legislators. Let me explain, [...]