A flurry of ethics bills have been introduced recently by members of the District of Columbia City Council in a belated effort to shore up the city’s badly battered public image in the wake of serious corruption allegations against Mayor Vincent Gray and various council members. The investigations have one thing in common: secretive transfers of unaccounted-for cash. The corrupting influence of money on always-campaigning public officials has already been well documented, but D.C.’s current ethics laws include a number of loopholes that allow easy evasion. However, expecting the same people who directly benefit from the loopholes to close them is expecting too much, as the puny $5,000 cap on fines for ethical violations proposed by council Chairman Kwame Brown, himself under investigation, and Ward 3 member Mary Cheh makes painfully clear. At-large Councilman Vincent Orange has gone a step further, proposing a new ethics committee with subpoena power. But as The Washington Examiner’s columnist Jonetta Rose Barras points out, the city already has a three-member Board of Elections and Ethics that is supposed to keep tabs on all campaign cash. It doesn’t work because the Democrat-controlled council refused to confirm Republican Mital Gandhi as the lone minority party member required under the city’s Home Rule Charter, and the two Democrats on the board are not doing their job. Another ethics board would be no different.
Stringent new guidelines on reporting campaign contributions — minus the loopholes — are needed, with tougher consequences for violations. But that’s still not enough. During their campaigns, both Mayor Gray and Chairman Brown promised The Washington Examiner editorial board that they would post the city’s checkbook online in an easily accessible and searchable format so the public could track every tax dollar the city spends. Now would be a good time to make good on your promises, Mr. Mayor and Mr. Chairman.
Although the Office of Contracting and Procurement posts purchase orders over $2,500, it contains virtually no other information beyond the name of the vendor and the amount of the contract, with a disclaimer that the D.C. government does not vouch for the “completeness, accuracy or content of any data.” Compare that with Overland, Kansas’ e-checkbook, which includes a detailed list of all revenue and easy-to-track, updated expenditures pulled directly from the city’s financial database — right down to the $2.50 spent by the city manager’s office for an Eagle Scout recognition award. If the council really wants to improve its tarnished image, show us the checkbook. All of it.
