Endorsements and editorials are made solely by the ownership of this newspaper. As is the case at most newspapers across the nation, The Spokesman-Review newsroom and its editors are not a part of this endorsement process. (Learn more.)

Editorial: Self-serving bills need impartial scrutiny

Sat., Feb. 14, 2015

A suggestion for elected officials: Hire an average citizen as a consultant, and run so-called reforms past him or her. If an idea induces eye-rolling, drop it. We offer this advice because politicians seem ever-clueless to how the public will perceive their actions. A couple of recent examples:

The U.S Open is coming to Pierce County in June, and county leaders want state legislators to attend this prestigious golf tournament. But the tickets are $110 a pop, and the maximum gift amount for lawmakers is $50. So they looked for a loophole and found it: Conduct “business” at Chambers Bay Golf Course while the world’s best golfers flail through the rough.

The county ran this stroke of genius by the Legislative Ethics Board, which ruled that legislators could accept free tickets.

The business end of this visit entails “a three-hour presentation that shares recent improvements made to Chambers Bay Golf Course, as well as plans for the site,” the Olympian reported. In addition, lawmakers will learn how the collaboration of government agencies helped bring the event to Washington, and what the economic impact is expected to be.

The tournament will be big. So huge, in fact, that Pierce County official Al Rose said in a letter to the Ethics Board, “You’ve really got to witness the event to understand how big it is.” Rose added that Pierce County would like the U.S Open to return, and it wants state lawmakers on board.

Free tickets will surely help.

It’s at this point where the average citizen would ask, “Couldn’t business be conducted before or after the tournament?” Sure, but then the famous golfers they’re allegedly not coming to see wouldn’t be there.

This calls for a penalty stroke.

A second example involves an attempt to expand ethical boundaries and the process for investigating possible wrongdoing. Lt. Gov. Brad Owen is still angry with a $15,000 settlement negotiated with the Washington State Executive Ethics Board last year to resolve alleged misappropriation of office funds to promote his anti-bullying organization.

So he’s lobbying for two bills. One would expand the scope of official duties to include the kind of extracurricular charitable activity he was involved with. The second would call for the attorney general’s office to defend politicians against ethics charges, rather than conduct investigations into their activities.

Owen found two sympathizers in the Senate who have had their own ethics woes, Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, and Sen. Don Benton, R-Vancouver. They head the committee that took testimony.

Now, if this trio were to ask the average citizen about this, he or she might ask, “Isn’t this a bit self-serving?”

That’s a charitable assessment.

If ethics guidelines and processes need changing, let an objective, unaffected party come forward and make the case. As it is, these bills don’t pass the eye-roll test.