You are here
The Effects of Ethics Reform in Louisiana
Wednesday, January 22nd, 2014
Robert Wechsler
One of the biggest problems in government ethics is determining
whether ethics reforms "work." A
well written article in the Advocate looked at Louisiana's
ethics enforcement since the reforms instituted by Gov. Jindal
became applicable in 2009. Louisiana's ethics program has
jurisdiction over local officials.
One of the two biggest changes was to bring in a board of retired administrative judges to hear and determine ethics cases. Before, the state ethics board heard and determined ethics cases. Now it only advocates for the state in these cases. The second biggest change was to raise the standard of proof.
Since ethics proceeding statistics are inconsistent, it is often difficult to determine very much from them. However, there are some clear statistics in Louisiana. One involves settlements, which Louisiana calls "consent opinions." According to the article, "in each year since the Ethics Adjudicatory Board took over, there have been fewer 'consent opinions,' in which the accused admits wrongdoing and usually pays a fine. In 2008, 50 officials entered into consent opinions, compared to 25 during 2013." The ethics board "won" 14 cases in 2013. It is likely that, under the former rules, many of these cases would have been settled, saving taxpayers as well as officials a lot of money. A third change is partly responsible. Kathleen Allen, the ethics administrator, told the Advocate that by halving the length of time allowed between starting an investigation and bringing charges, the Jindal reforms also cut short the time available to negotiate settlements.
Another damaging change is the increased formality of the ethics enforcement process. There are now more motions, counter-motions, and procedural machinations resulting in more delay. "The Ethics Adjudicatory Board had 227 cases on its docket in the fiscal year that ended June 30. The judges held 96 hearings and 587 prehearing conferences, resulting in 1,041 decisions, mostly on various motions common in a court of law but typically much rarer in an administrative hearing setting."
With resources limited, ethics officials' time sucked up by enforcement, along with the need to provide oversight regarding disclosures, takes away resources from training and advice, which are more important, but less visible, than enforcement.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
One of the two biggest changes was to bring in a board of retired administrative judges to hear and determine ethics cases. Before, the state ethics board heard and determined ethics cases. Now it only advocates for the state in these cases. The second biggest change was to raise the standard of proof.
Since ethics proceeding statistics are inconsistent, it is often difficult to determine very much from them. However, there are some clear statistics in Louisiana. One involves settlements, which Louisiana calls "consent opinions." According to the article, "in each year since the Ethics Adjudicatory Board took over, there have been fewer 'consent opinions,' in which the accused admits wrongdoing and usually pays a fine. In 2008, 50 officials entered into consent opinions, compared to 25 during 2013." The ethics board "won" 14 cases in 2013. It is likely that, under the former rules, many of these cases would have been settled, saving taxpayers as well as officials a lot of money. A third change is partly responsible. Kathleen Allen, the ethics administrator, told the Advocate that by halving the length of time allowed between starting an investigation and bringing charges, the Jindal reforms also cut short the time available to negotiate settlements.
Another damaging change is the increased formality of the ethics enforcement process. There are now more motions, counter-motions, and procedural machinations resulting in more delay. "The Ethics Adjudicatory Board had 227 cases on its docket in the fiscal year that ended June 30. The judges held 96 hearings and 587 prehearing conferences, resulting in 1,041 decisions, mostly on various motions common in a court of law but typically much rarer in an administrative hearing setting."
With resources limited, ethics officials' time sucked up by enforcement, along with the need to provide oversight regarding disclosures, takes away resources from training and advice, which are more important, but less visible, than enforcement.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
