Barth: Ethics overhaul would win the vote
by Jay Barth
A bit over a year ago in this space, I made the case that if presented the opportunity at the ballot box, Arkansas voters would ratify a significant ethics overhaul. Recent polling on the Regnat Populus initiative, which had its ballot title cleared by the attorney general last week so that petition signature gathering can begin, supports that analysis.
In a Talk Business-Hendrix College poll late last month, the key provisions of the measure — ending corporate and union donations to Arkansas campaigns, employing the "Wal-Mart rule" to prevent lobbyists from providing gifts to legislators, and a two year cooling-off period before outgoing legislators could be employed as lobbyists — gain the support of 69 percent of those surveyed with majority support across most all groups of Arkansans (the tepid support among African Americans provides an interesting exception).
It's clear that those who oppose the measure likely cannot win at the ballot box. Therefore, stopping the measure from getting on the ballot with a "decline to sign" campaign is their best shot at stopping it. The opponents of the measure are aided by Regnat Populus's incredibly late start with a July 1 deadline looming, their present lack of money for paid canvassers to collect signatures, and the fact that the primary election that serves as their best shot to gain large numbers of those signatures is one where turnout will be abysmal because the most scintillating race on most ballots is a low-key race for Supreme Court.
Some of the most engaged opposition to Regnat Populus is coming from progressive legislators who say that the measure will further disempower folks like them, especially those without personal resources necessary to be a "most-time" legislator. They argue that, in the term-limits era there is not time for legislators to become influential experts and that the best opportunities for "crash courses" are out-of-state conferences with costly travel. Their desire to be effective legislators is to be praised, but reform's costs are less than they suggest and the benefits of reform outpace them. First, if the educational group carrying out the conference is not lobbying here, its supporters could pay for the legislative travel under the measure. Moreover, there are many more legislators attending meetings sponsored by ALEC (which, we know from reports this week, is actively lobbying in Arkansas on issues like health care reform) and like groups than attending conferences on the latest research on the perils of fracking or benefits of afterschool programs. Finally, even when that travel connects legislators with other progressives from around the country, entities lobbying in Arkansas paying for it is fundamentally problematic. Even if legislators could ignore who paid for their trip when a vote important to the group comes along, it raises a perception of impropriety that harms the public trust.
The critics also underplay the considerable good that would come from the measure. Although the lobbyists who offer legislators trusted information on complex issues would maintain their legitimate role in the system, the lobbyists who rely upon steaks in the backroom of Doe's to gain votes during sessions would have that tool taken away from them. Moreover, the new rules would level the playing field for citizen activists who reach out to their legislators during the legislative process.
In addition to reducing the role of the lobbyists who rely on gifts to sway votes, the measure would — over time — create change in the types of individuals who run for the legislature. Those who are drawn to the perks of office or to the promise of a lobbying job immediately after leaving office would no longer have an interest in the post. That would be a considerable step forward for the state and for the people's interests.
We need to use technology to enhance disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures. We need to expand the Bureau of Legislative Research to provide legislators research without reliance on out-of-state trips. We need to raise legislative pay (removing per diems) to make it viable for rank and file citizens to do the job. We need to admit that the most severe term limits in the country are doing harm to our state. First, however, we need to take the step forward that Regnat Populus offers us.
Comments (3)
Showing 1-3 of 3
More by Jay Barth
-
Must a GOP candidate be from Northwest Arkansas?
Jay Barth, Hendrix politics prof and Times contributor, offers the following analysis on Republican primary voting patterns and what they could mean for a candidate from outside Northwest Arkansas, the historic GOP base in the state.
- May 2, 2013
-
Barth: The DREAM remains alive
Within days, we will know whether the Arkansas DREAM Act, the legislation focused on providing in-state college tuition to undocumented young people who have been educated in the state's high schools, has legs in this legislative session.
- Mar 28, 2013
- More »
People who saved…
Readers also liked…
-
Hope and change
Last week brought some hopeful developments on the political front in a state that Gallup says has risen to be the sixth most-conservative in the country.
- Feb 8, 2012
-
Regnat's plan to end railroading
Progressives broke the railroads' 40-year stranglehold on the Arkansas legislature after the Civil War only once, in 1897, when the legislature dared to refer to the people a constitutional amendment that set up a state agency to regulate the railroads.
- Mar 21, 2012
Latest in Jay Barth
-
Pryor and the politics of provincialism
Provincialism — that sense that Arkansans have limited use for the world beyond Arkansas's borders — has been a defining characteristic of the state's politics and society for its entire existence.
- Jun 13, 2013
-
Still ripe for reform in Arkansas?
Last February, the Arkansas Public Policy Panel and Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation released a report I authored titled "Ripe for Reform: Arkansas as a Model for Social Change."
- May 23, 2013
-
It's not just geography that matters in Arkansas GOP primary
In a blog post last week, I made the case that geography no longer creates a clear barrier to the Republican nomination for a candidate from outside of Northwest Arkansas like House Speaker Davy Carter.
- May 9, 2013
- More »
Event Calendar
-
Re: Pryor and the politics of provincialism
Maybe. Depends on who his oppostition will be on the GOP side. I usually vote…
- on June 17, 2013
-
Re: Pryor and the politics of provincialism
So Steven, does that mean you'll be voting for Pryor in the next election?
- on June 17, 2013
Site Index
News
Cover Story / Arkansas Reporter / The Week That Was / Smart Talk / The Insider / The Observer / Editorial / Max Brantley / Ernest Dumas / Gene Lyons / Bob Lancaster / Words / Guest Writer / Letters
Entertainment
A&E Feature / To-Do List / In Brief / Movie Reviews / Music Reviews / Theater Reviews / A&E News / Art Notes / Graham Gordy / Books / Media / Dining Reviews / Dining Guide / What's Cookin' / Calendar / The Televisionist / Movie Listings / Gallery Listings
This Week's Cover
Quick Links
Special Publications
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
