Favorite

Extremist's good idea 

Jim Holt, the extreme conservative now twice defeated in statewide races, says he’ll probably still be seen around the legislative session next year advocating his interests as a regular citizen.

You remember those gems — criminalizing persons providing services to undocumented immigrants, opposing pre-kindergarten programs, eschewing any kind of minimum wage.

He’ll be wholly ineffective, of course, though no more than when he actually served in the Legislature.

That he’ll be thoroughly inept is mostly, but not exclusively, good news.

You see, Holt once had a splendid idea. It was to impose what some call the Wal-Mart rule on the state legislature.

Wal-Mart buyers are barred from accepting even a cup of coffee from vendors. Holt once talked of leading a drive for an initiated act to put that same kind of restriction on the dealings of state legislators and lobbyists.

If Holt had run for lieutenant governor along with a concurrent campaign for that initiated act as his calling card, he might have divorced himself from the corrupt Republican image in Washington, and won.

He certainly would have made life more interesting. How, exactly, would other candidates have managed to come out in favor of taking lobbyists’ gifts?

Somehow they’d have managed, I’m sure.

I should make clear: Special interest business lobbyists possess every right to represent their companies at the legislature. Some business lobbyists are fine men and women. A couple are friends of mine, at least to the narrow extent permitted by our disparate professional interests and my unpleasant disposition.

But special interest lobbyists, whether business or otherwise, should not be permitted to seek or exert special influence over legislation by purchasing food, drink or entertainment for legislators.

Some legislators tell me it happens before they know it. They hear, “Your bill has been taken care of, sir.”

Lobbyists should not be permitted even to leave an impression of seeking or exerting special influence.

That’s the issue, really. Legislators say haughtily that they can’t be bought for the price of dinner. Wal-Mart buyers would tell you the same thing. But dinners add up. And the point is to offer hard evidence of independence to the customer, or taxpayer, and protect the integrity of your institution.

Personal ethics are internal, between one and his conscience. But institutional ethics need to be put in writing. Rep. Jones can’t be responsible for Rep. Smith’s conscience. But he can insist that they live by the same written rules.

We need a simple law saying legislators may not accept any gift or favor of any monetary value from any registered special interest lobbyist or from any person with interests pending before the Legislature and without a preceding personal relationship.

You could permit an exception for those ubiquitous receptions that chambers of commerce and trade groups sponsor during legislative sessions. The Ethics Commission could sort all that out.

The chances of such a measure becoming law? None for a bill in thelegislature. We’re talking about a club and a culture and a disease.

Only as an initiated act might such a policy ever be imposed.

Let’s be candid: This is not our new governor’s strength.

Mike Beebe has always liked business lobbyists for dinner partners and golf rivals. He always told me that he advocated public disclosure of lobbyists’ spending for legislative entertainment instead of an outright ban.

That’s an odd insistence when you think about it — standing up for the right of lobbyists to wine and dine legislators and requiring only that lobbyists file generalized public reports.

We can assume that Beebe didn’t raise those record millions from the state’s business establishment so that he could put the quietus on business lobbyists’ practices.

I’m suddenly remembering debating a man on this issue a few years ago at John Brown University. The fellow opposing a Wal-Mart rule for legislators was the state Poultry Federation’s lobbyist. I probably should mention that he’s now the chief of staff to the governor-elect.

Favorite

Sign up for the Daily Update email

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by John Brummett

  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • Can we talk? Can we get anywhere?

    Dialogue is good. It would be even better if someone would venture off script every once in a while.
    • Sep 21, 2011
  • More »

More by Max Brantley

  • Where's the outrage?

    Am I the only person, apart from federal prosecutors, outraged about the criminal enterprise that inveigled itself into a privileged position as an Arkansas taxpayer-financed human services provider to the tune, today, of $43 million a year?
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Where's the outrage?

    • Jun 21, 2018
  • Rutledge opponent hits her socializing with corporate interests

    Mike Lee, the Democratic candidate for attorney general, has criticized Attorney General Leslie Rutledge over recent reports of her participation at private meetings where corporate interests make big contributions to a political group she heads for access to state legal officers.
    • Jun 21, 2018
  • More »

Latest in John Brummett

  • Gone to the DoG

    We're now longer carrying John Brummett's column in this space.
    • Oct 12, 2011
  • Obstruction is the preferred conservatism

    Is there greater conservative virtue in opposing federal health reform, period, or in saying it ought to be implemented locally instead of from Washington in the event we are unavoidably laden with it?
    • Oct 5, 2011
  • A fate not quite as bad as prison for Lu Hardin

    There is no crime in being overly and transparently solicitous for the purposes of aggrandizement and personal political advancement. That's simply acute neediness, a common and benign human frailty.
    • Sep 28, 2011
  • More »

Most Viewed

  • The cult of Trump

    Nearly 40 years ago our country was introduced to two major phenomena centering around cults: namely, the Moonies and the Shiite Muslims. There were others, as well, and I soon became fascinated with the dynamics of cults and cult leaders (both religious and secular) in general — leading me to read a number of books and articles, some even written by those who had been deprogrammed after spending time in a cult.
  • The battle over Issue 1

    The odds are that the most spending in a statewide campaign in Arkansas this year will not be for a constitutional office, but instead in a battle over a proposed state constitutional amendment.

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: The cult of Trump

    • Those traits sound like most any politician in DC, mostly the Dims.

    • on June 22, 2018
  • Re: Hardened

    • Ronnie Floyd's scorn is a badge of honor, wear it with pride

    • on June 22, 2018
  • Re: The cult of Trump

    • Good job, Rabbi!

    • on June 22, 2018
 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation