Texas Ethics Commission just made a gift to corrupt politicians
Ethics Commission does Texans a huge disservice
Panel's ruling that state officials need not report the value of monetary gifts they receive from their supporters is a travesty.
November 29, 2006
Consider this hypothetical case. You're a state official. Someone who expects favorable action on a matter under your control gives you a check - say, for $100,000 or even $200,000. Do you have to disclose it?
Incredibly, the Texas Ethics Commission ruled in April that all you must do is report that you received a check as a gift, without revealing the amount. Editorial writers reacted quickly, saying the ruling opened the door to greater graft and corruption in Texas, creating a loophole for officials to accept large amounts of cash.
Behind this decision was a real case. Bill Ceverha, a member of the State Employees Retirement System, got a check from Republican contributor Bob Perry. Texas law requires officials to file financial disclosure statements, including a description of gifts in excess of $250.
Ceverha disclosed he received a check without specifying the amount. Through newspaper interviews, it was revealed that he received two checks from Perry, each for $50,000, to defray legal expenses; he was treasurer of a political action committee, Texans for Republican Majority, which was under investigation. It was also reported that Bob Perry had no interest in the Texas State Retirement System, which oversees a $20 billion system, that no quid pro quo was involved.
That may all be true, but the ruling by the Ethics Commission has far greater implications than this one case.
On Monday, the Ethics Commission had a chance to undo the original mistake, but it reaffirmed its earlier ruling. The commission voted 5-3 to approve a staff advisory opinion that describing such a gift as a "check" is enough; no amount need be disclosed.
Back in April, Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the Austin office of Public Citizen, said the ruling was outrageous. It opens a huge loophole that would allow a Texas politician to accept a check for, say, $1 million as a gift and then simply disclose that he or she received a "check."
The Texas Ethics Commission just made a gift to corrupt politicians. Allowing monetary gifts of more than $250 to be listed as a generic "check" or "cash" makes a mockery of the commission's assignment to deal with problems of corruption to help restore public confidence in the integrity of state government. The Ethics Commission has somehow misinterpreted its mission; it is not supposed to be providing greater access to graft and corruption and less public accountability. This ruling screams out for a legislative remedy, which should come in the next session.
Panel's ruling that state officials need not report the value of monetary gifts they receive from their supporters is a travesty.
November 29, 2006
Consider this hypothetical case. You're a state official. Someone who expects favorable action on a matter under your control gives you a check - say, for $100,000 or even $200,000. Do you have to disclose it?
Incredibly, the Texas Ethics Commission ruled in April that all you must do is report that you received a check as a gift, without revealing the amount. Editorial writers reacted quickly, saying the ruling opened the door to greater graft and corruption in Texas, creating a loophole for officials to accept large amounts of cash.
Behind this decision was a real case. Bill Ceverha, a member of the State Employees Retirement System, got a check from Republican contributor Bob Perry. Texas law requires officials to file financial disclosure statements, including a description of gifts in excess of $250.
Ceverha disclosed he received a check without specifying the amount. Through newspaper interviews, it was revealed that he received two checks from Perry, each for $50,000, to defray legal expenses; he was treasurer of a political action committee, Texans for Republican Majority, which was under investigation. It was also reported that Bob Perry had no interest in the Texas State Retirement System, which oversees a $20 billion system, that no quid pro quo was involved.
That may all be true, but the ruling by the Ethics Commission has far greater implications than this one case.
On Monday, the Ethics Commission had a chance to undo the original mistake, but it reaffirmed its earlier ruling. The commission voted 5-3 to approve a staff advisory opinion that describing such a gift as a "check" is enough; no amount need be disclosed.
Back in April, Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of the Austin office of Public Citizen, said the ruling was outrageous. It opens a huge loophole that would allow a Texas politician to accept a check for, say, $1 million as a gift and then simply disclose that he or she received a "check."
The Texas Ethics Commission just made a gift to corrupt politicians. Allowing monetary gifts of more than $250 to be listed as a generic "check" or "cash" makes a mockery of the commission's assignment to deal with problems of corruption to help restore public confidence in the integrity of state government. The Ethics Commission has somehow misinterpreted its mission; it is not supposed to be providing greater access to graft and corruption and less public accountability. This ruling screams out for a legislative remedy, which should come in the next session.
posted by dannoynted1 | 11:07 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home