Ethics-reform measures need serious bulking up
EDITORIAL, Home News Tribune, May 26, 2004
New Jerseyans can take encouragement from the knowledge that the state Assembly passed 11 bills on Monday designed to bring about cleaner, more efficient state government.
At the same time, citizens should be concerned that none of the measures dealt effectively with the meat of ethics reform.
In short, there's a lot of heavy lifting to be done -- and very little time in which to do it -- if the Assembly's Democratic leadership intends to meet Gov. James E. McGreevey's deadline for passage of a comprehensive ethics reform package by July 1.
Assembly Democrats have presented a 25-point plan to reform ethics, lobbying and campaign-finance rules.
That leaves more than half of their platform, and the most substantive and difficult issues, unresolved -- just the right opportunity for Assembly Republicans to label their rivals' efforts so far "ethics-reform lite."
And there seems to be justification for that charge.
A survey of Monday's activity shows that of the bills that moved forward, most were of small consequence.
One piece of legislation changes the minimum campaign contribution for which details must be reported.
Another measure prohibits lobbyists from accepting contingency fees. Another alters legislative rules to prohibit lawmakers and partisan staff from distributing mass mailings in any year when those lawmakers are running for re-election.
Pretty easy stuff.
The strongest bill to advance expands limits on nepotism in lawmakers' district offices to the executive branch, independent authorities and interstate agencies, sewing up a yawning loophole.
Absent, however, was any ban on pay-to-play -- the practice of rewarding lucrative no-bid government contracts to generous campaign contributors -- a cornerstone of any reform.
Professional contractors pad their bills to cover the cost of donations, making government services more expensive for taxpayers.
Contractors' cash also purchases them a level of influence the public can't match.
Assembly Democrats have made no-bid contract reform part of their initiative.
Alas, not only has it languished, but their version of pay-to-play reform covers only state government, failing to place restrictions on county and municipal governments, an essential provision for pay-to-play patronage to be eliminated.
Nor do Assembly Democrats plan to seek a ban on dual-office holding, a conflict of interest for lawmakers -- who also serve, for instance, as mayors -- who divide loyalties between their respective constituencies.
Until these and other core reforms are made law, good government remains an illusion. Assembly Democrats can do better.
|
