Yes, it’s a big title but such a quote deserves to be placed front and center.
According to the AP:
Ethics board chairman Hank Perret called the proposed changes “ill-conceived” and said they would destroy the independence and transparency of the ethics board, which investigates ethics complaints.
“In effect, the ethics board will disappear from the light of public scrutiny. Why would anybody want that?”
Let me repeat that for all the Jindal lovers who believed that Louisiana would be best served by the “ethics champion” Bobby Jindal.
In effect, the ethics board will disappear from the light of public scrutiny
Also stated by the head of the ethics board is:
‘”With the exception of enforcement, the bills proposed are a huge leap forward for Louisiana,” he said.”
Now, what good are ethics changes if the enforcement of those laws is flawed?
The problems with the bill are:
- The ethics board will no longer make decisions on whether someone violated the law.
- The governor will get to pick who makes those decisions, politicizing the decisions.
- It requires the board to offer settlements. (Why should the board be forced to take an action that might not be the best decision?)
- It would hide the names of people asking for advisory opinions from view.
Jindal’s deputy chief of staff said:
“We’re comfortable with the proposal,”
OF COURSE THEY ARE!!!!! I think the situation is becoming clearer as the ethics session continues. First and foremost, as discussed on 99.5 earlier, the plan wont even take effect until after his first term. Now, we have a plan that weakens the ethics board and removes transparency from the process. By removing transparency, and making it so less people know about the ethical problems, it will be harder for people to perceive the ethical problems (since they will be harder to see!).
Perhaps the Jindal administration feels that if people are less capable of seeing the ethical problems, they will assume that the ethical problems are no longer there. The ostrich method seems fairly typical for Republicans, so I am not surprised. In reality, nobody will be fooled by these pathetic attempts at solving our perception problems. As I said previously, the best way to solve our ethics perception problem is to solve the ethics problem. However, as this ethics session continues, it is clear that Jindal’s “plan” will only fool those die hard Jindal supporters who will view anything passed with the title of “ethics” as success for their wunderkind.
And as I said, if any of them try and claim that Jindal is still strong on ethics, I will outwardly laugh at them.