I wish to pose a question: As individuals, is it enough to call on ourselves to merely avoid breaking rules? In the news and debate on ethics, conversation has been dominated by language discussing misdeeds and scandal. Surely, as a society, we are well aware of what is undesirable and unbecoming behavior in our leaders.
A political leader is in a unique position, as one is, as Edmund Burke described, “considered an instructor of [their] fellow citizens in their highest concerns.” As Mr. Burke, the Anglo-Irish statesman and political philosopher, begins to describe political excellence, he states simply that leaders must be “taught to respect one’s self.” Allowing one’s self to fall prey to political corruption and misbehavior is surely contrary to respecting one’s self, and as we have seen, it can lead to the ousting from one’s office, the degradation of marriages, incarceration and the disappointment of the public.
We must hold ourselves to higher standards. The governor declared that there was an agreement on ethics, and the Legislature responded by passing a bill. There were several positive and encouraging additions to the reform policy, such as expanding the scope on income and asset reporting of not only public officials, but government employees. Furthermore, lobbyists have to now disclose their business and financial dealings with legislators and public employees. It’s incredibly important for the public to know who or what could have an influence on public servants and officials.
Considering the number of politicians and public officials that have left office in shame or, worse, handcuffs, it is especially important that we remove taxpayer-funded pensions from convicted political felons. The taxpayer should never have to pay for the pension of someone who violated public trust. These items are encouraging and are positive steps forward in reforming New York government, yet more needs to be done.
Ethics laws are only as effective as those who enforce them, and I have concerns over the proposed way the newly created Joint Commission on Public Ethics (J-COPE) will be formed. The governor gave himself six appointments, which inherently will give him more influence over this regulating agency, more appointments than members of each house of the legislature are granted.
Further exasperating the problem is the fact that legislative appointments favor the majorities of each house, translating into might makes right. Minority conferences help balance discussion and debate. It could be especially disconcerting if one party controlled the executive office and both legislative houses.
It has been noted by some that J-COPE “is so deeply flawed in its structure as to be wholly ineffective.” To bring about any investigation on a public official, the commission would need to have at least eight members supporting such action with two members of the same party of the individual in question. Such a system could cave under political pressures.
Ethical legislators take pause and examine the consequences and implications of their actions. They continually examine policy, judging as to whether the legislation achieves its end goal – in this case – ethics. It is clear to me that the 2011 ethics bill is well meaning and takes us further and closer to reforming government so that New York can foster and support legislators who not only respect themselves, but the citizens they represent. However, as I have highlighted, more work remains, and we cannot forget to further address the weaknesses in J-COPE.
As always, if you have any questions or comments about government ethics or any state issues, please don’t hesitate to contact me at either my Johnstown office at (518) 762-6486, my Herkimer office at (315) 866-1632, or by emailing me at butlerm@assembly.state.ny.us.