After nearly two years, the D.C. Council appears poised to deliver comprehensive ethics reform. A roundtable to discuss draft legislation has been scheduled for Wednesday. The Committee on Government Operations, headed by Ward 4’s Muriel Bowser, has deftly merged several different proposals into a single strong bill that could be a blunt force against bad-behaving officials, including the mayor, legislators, and advisory neighborhood commissioners. The legislation doesn’t simply respond to the shenanigans and corruption displayed this past year. It also anticipates future misdeeds and provides residents an opportunity to kick the bums out sooner — not later. Let’s shout hallelujah.
“It’s a serious effort to restore the public’s trust,” Bowser said about the Board of Ethics and Government Accountability Establishment and Ethics Reform Amendment Act of 2011.
Among other things, the bill would mandate greater disclosure by government officials; establish new reporting requirements for legal defense funds, transition and inaugural committees; and prohibit lobbyists from providing discounted legal services to elected officials. Constituent services funds would be reduced from $80,000 to $40,000 and strict limitations on the use of that money would be established — no more sports tickets or political dinners.
Fines of up to $25,000 or imprisonment for 12 months could be imposed on individuals whose actions “substantially threaten the public trust.” Furthermore, elected officials could be recalled at any time in their term; currently the law restricts such action to only the second or third year. Unfortunately, residents still would be burdened with collecting massive numbers of petition signatures.
Wisely, the committee has proposed creating a separate body to enforce the law. “We need a new board of ethics to shape a new culture,” Bowser told me.
Amen to that.
Residents need an incorruptible, muscular entity to ensure officials follow the law. As was made clear earlier this year, there are times the attorney general or the inspector general can’t fulfill that obligation. Both declined to examine allegations of misconduct by Vincent C. Gray’s 2010 mayoral campaign and his new administration. The job instead went to the legislature and the U.S. attorney. Moreover, investigations of ethics violations can’t rely on pro bono assistance from law firms, some of which do business with the city.
People have suggested the Office of Campaign Finance could do the job, if it had more money and staff. There’s way too much evidence of the OCF’s incompetence to buy that argument. It can’t be eliminated soon enough.
Still, there are improvements Bowser and her committee could make to the proposed ethics and accountability board: They may want to consider expanding the panel from three to five members. To shield the board against possible political disruption, members should be appointed to five-year terms, instead of the proposed three years.
There likely will be other suggestions for changes. But, the council should resist the urge to muck with the bill — unless there’s irrefutable evidence such action will make it stronger, ensuring residents won’t witness, again, despicable behaviors like those perpetrated this year by their elected officials.
Jonetta Rose Barras’s column appears on Monday and Wednesday. She can be reached at [email protected].
