A bill from legislative leaders would strengthen conflict-of-interest standards and increase the transparency of the state’s ethics commission. These are necessary changes, and lawmakers should support LD 1008.

One of the biggest changes suggested by Senate President Beth Edmonds is to allow the public to file complaints for violations of legislative ethics. The statute now refers to legislators filing complaints.

In 2005, the Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices faced concerns that Rep. Thomas Saviello, the environmental manager of the International Paper mill in Jay and then a member of the Natural Resources Committee, violated legislative ethics rules by voting on and developing policies that affected his employer. The commission received requests for an investigation from Rep. Saviello and the Conservation Law Foundation. After a closed-door meeting, the commission allowed Rep. Saviello to withdraw his request and later voted 2-2 to not pursue the CLF complaint. Two commission members said they felt they did not have jurisdiction to investigate a complaint from an entity other than a lawmaker, despite assurances from the Attorney General’s Office that it could.

This left the public with no place to go when they believe a lawmaker has acted improperly.

LD 1008, which is co-sponsored by House Speaker Glenn Cummings, would rectify this by allowing the public to file complaints against sitting lawmakers. To address concerns that complaints may be filed to harass lawmakers, the bill offers lawmakers protection from frivolous and “bad faith” complaints.

Following the recommendations of a legislative advisory committee on ethics, LD 1008 requires that Ethics Commission proceedings be conducted in public once the commission decides a complaint should be investigated.

LD 1008 goes further than the advisory committee’s suggestions in fixing another problem that arose during the Saviello case, which was the absence of the commission’s fifth, tie-breaking member because lawmakers had been unable to agree on who should fill this seat. The bill would require only two votes in favor of an investigation if the commission was missing its fifth member.

The bill also clarifies and strengthens the conflict of interest definition. The advisory committee rightly decided that the current language requiring lawmakers to recuse themselves from legislative action only when they would enjoy a “unique and distinct” benefit is too narrow. Under LD 1008, a conflict arises when legislation would benefit or harm a lawmaker, an immediate family member or economic associate, which includes employers, “to a degree that is significantly greater than similarly situated persons or entities.”

LD 1008 has no prohibition against lawmakers serving on committees that regulate their employers, or in the Saviello case, formulate, change and oversee the enforcement of laws that the lawmaker is charged with upholding for his employer. Although this may be an extreme case, better statutory guidance would help identify inappropriate committee assignments.

By requiring more transparency, clear standards and a public complaint process, this bill will fix major shortcomings in state ethics rules.