Ethics in our Government

Maybe I’m naïve, but the great majority of people I know in state government seem honest, intelligent, and well-intentioned.  We may not agree on solutions, but I think most legislators are motivated by the public interest, not personal gain.

Yet that’s not how the people see us, at least based on the emails in my inbox and the feedback at my town hall meetings.  Public officials are widely viewed with suspicion, even contempt.

I’m afraid that here in Connecticut, politicians have earned their reputation.  We’ve suffered a string of scandals, with both state and local officials convicted, and federal officeholders guilty of reckless behavior and embarrassing misrepresentations.

Despite that record, ethics is hardly discussed at the capitol.  Modest proposals by Carol Carson, executive director of the Office of State Ethics, and by State Senator John McKinney to establish standards and procedures for violations have been rejected out of hand by legislative leadership.

Worst of all, I fear we grow accustomed to a certain amount of corruption.  Incompetent and dishonest people are found in every profession: it’s a small step from saying that we can’t expect moral perfection in politics to accepting improper behavior as part of the business.

When Tom Foley raised the issue of ethics with me earlier this year, I doubted the question would draw much interest: I thought the press would find it old hat, and the public an abstraction.  Thinking there could be no harm in it, I collaborated with Ambassador Foley in drafting legislation to curb conflicts of interest, and used a forgotten rule to petition the bill—SB 727--for a hearing.

Our reception at the capitol opened my eyes.  Ambassador Foley was subjected to an hour of self-righteous indignation and condescending dismissal.  Instead of embracing the need for ethical improvement and helping us craft a better bill, the political establishment in both parties mocked the need for reform.

The Ambassador has dealt with some tough customers, and his reception in Hartford did not deter him.  Revelations in the roll-your-own scandal—and the convictions which followed—brought new support and enthusiasm for our effort.

On the closing day of session, I moved an amendment which represented a reasonable, carefully-crafted delineation of ethical standards.  It would require that legislators who work for state contractors, public sector unions, or firms which provide lobbying services recuse themselves on issues which would directly affect their employers.

Our purpose was to define clearly the bounds of proper legislative behavior by creating simple rules we all can understand and respect.  I’m not as interested in catching people when they’ve strayed—by then the damage is done, to the institution itself and to the wrong-doers—as in helping them see clearly what is improper, so they can avoid error.

Our amendment attracted the unanimous support of Republican State Senators, and good words from the Democratic proponent of the underlying bill, who acknowledged the need for ethical reform but did not wish to jeopardize his legislation.  Ambassador Foley and I now have an opportunity to refine our proposal, to build public awareness, and to gain the support we will need at the capitol to pass ethics legislation in the next session.

That would be a long-overdue first step.  We must also address conflicts of interest in the executive branch, among both political appointees and powerful state bureaucrats.  That’s a reform that our current governor, with his inclination to issuing executive orders, might consider undertaking on his own authority.

It is all too easy to lose the idealism which first draws us into the political arena.  Making the process work becomes an end in itself, while the demands of the job can lead to a sense of entitlement, which obscures our vision of public service.  Recognizing our own human frailty, and remembering the sad examples of those who transgressed, we must draw lines of behavior which are bright and appropriate, for our own sake and for the good of our state.