[StBernard] Ethics laws are our treat: James Gill

[Westley Annis]

And I supposed you all saw this earlier:

The House voted 41-56 Monday to kill a bill by Rep. J. Kevin Pearson
<http://house.louisiana.gov/H_Reps/members.asp?ID=76> , R-Slidell, that
would have suspended government retirement benefits
<http://topics.nola.com/tag/state-retirement-bills/index.html>  to public
servants while they are serving time in prison. 

The bill, which would have continued benefits to a spouse, was amended to
apply only to incarcerations resulting from illegal activity related to the
public service. It had passed the House Retirement Committee by a vote of
4-3 and received substantial criticism in the floor debate Monday before
going down in defeat.

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/04/house_kills_bill_suspending_p
r.html

So I guess if a legislator had shot another legislator on the House or
Senate floor he or she would have lost their pension, but **only** while
they were incarcerated.  But if they had shot just the average Joe or Jane
on the street their pensions would have gone on.  It's good that in their
wisdom they decided this was all too complicated and just decided to kill it
all.

JY




	-----------------------------------------------------
	Ethics laws are our treat: James Gill
	By James Gill
	April 25, 2010, 6:30AM
	
	It would be a great lark to drop the nickel on some state librarian
for
	accepting a bag of cookies from a grateful bibliophile, especially
if it was
	just before Christmas. The Ethics Board would be bound to
investigate,
	having opined that such gifts are against the law.
	
	
	The law has doubtless been frequently, if unwittingly, violated. But
when
	the fastidious employees of a St. Tammany Parish library were
tempted with
	cookies during the festive season of 2008, they sought the Ethics
Board's
	counsel.
	
	Now that the law is clear, perhaps it behooves public-spirited
citizens to
	prowl the stacks in search of bespectacled matrons with a hand in
the cookie
	jar. We must all do our bit to stamp out government corruption.
	
	It is true that ratting out a helpful librarian might be regarded as
	somewhat petty and mean-spirited.
	
	But you would be spared the sidelong glances generally reserved for
	busybodies. The law says a complainant's name shall never be
revealed.
	
	We had better hurry, however, for moves are afoot to spoil the fun.
Rep.
	Nita Hutter, R-Chalmette has filed one bill making it legal for
public
	employees to accept small tokens of appreciation and another
removing the
	cloak of anonymity from ethics informants.
	
	Hutter proposes that public servants may accept gifts worth up to
$15 each
	for a total of no more than $45 a year. Legislators can hardly
refuse
	without looking piggish and two-faced, given that they may be seen
all over
	Baton Rouge scarfing up on the lobbyist's tab. Their concept of
self-denial
	in the name of ethics reform was to limit their freeloading to $50 a
	sitting.
	
	Right. They'll look piggish and two-faced however they vote. But
they'll
	look worse if they kill this bill. Librarians are offered gifts only
for
	performing a public service well. If only the same could be said for
	legislators.
	
	In truth, it would be no fun nailing a librarian on a cookie rap
anyway. The
	Ethics Board, which imposes only derisory punishment on the
grubbiest
	politicians, is hardly going to throw the book at a librarian.
	
	Hutter's other ethics bill requires complainants to be publicly
identified
	once a case has been resolved. It serves no public purpose
whatsoever, and
	benefits only politicians. Legislators, as they return from lunch
with their
	favorite lobbyists, may thus be happy to vote for it. They did last
year
	when Hutter filed a similar bill, but Gov. Bobby Jindal vetoed it.
	
	Jindal, as an advocate of high ethical standards for all public
officials,
	save, perhaps, himself, will presumably veto this one too if it
makes it to
	his desk. Certainly he should.
	
	Legislators argue that complainants should be publicly named because
they
	often have political motives. Maybe they do, but that is of no
consequence.
	All that matters is whether the alleged dirty deed did in fact
occur.
	Legislators who deplore politics should go find work in gentler
surroundings
	-- maybe a public library.
	
	So long as they remain in the political game, you can be sure they
will use
	the powers of office to exact revenge if they are crossed. If
Hutter's bill
	ever passed, Ethics Board staff would be sitting around all day
twiddling
	their fingers.
	
	Regardless, they will probably never again have to confront the
cookie
	issue. Since we will soon be free to shower snacks on our favorite
	librarians, the sole remaining issue is whether to bake our own or
go to the
	store.
	
	Obviously loyal citizens taking the latter course would plump for
the
	official state cookie.
	Astoundingly, Louisiana does not have one. But here comes Sen.
Yvonne
	Dorsey, D-Baton Rouge, to remedy that deficiency. Her bill
designates the
	tea cake for that honor.
	It is an odd choice, since hardly anyone of my acquaintance knows
what a tea
	cake looks like. No doubt they are more familiar in Baton Rouge.
Maybe
	Dorsey even has a constituent who makes them. It could be that some
Baton
	Rouge librarian is eating a forbidden tea cake right now.
	
	James Gill is a columnist for The Times-Picayune. He can be reached
at
	jgill at timespicayune.com or at 504.826.3318.