ETHICAL ENTANGLEMENTS SPAWN CONFUSION

Based on the amount of time devoted to the subject, not to mention the residual differences still remaining between the parties involved, Missourians might logically conclude that the goal of assuring ethical conduct by their elected and top appointed officials is one of the most elusive aspirations of mankind. The subject has been debated, ad nauseum, for more than a year, and as of this moment, resolution of the differences appears as distant as Jupiter or Mars, whichever comes last.

Judging from the time spent on the subject, many citizens might conclude that ethics policing is not a favorite subject in Missouri's capital city. And they would be right. Telling the many high-principled public servants with which the state is blessed that they need someone to look over their shoulder while serving in official positions is like telling Arnold Schwarzenegger that he needs to watch his diet. For the vast majority of men and women serving in the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government in Jefferson City, public office is a public trust that is inviolable. We are never judgmental of those officials who complain that all the emphasis now being given to ethical oversight reflects unfairly on them. They have a point; artists seeking to paint realistic scenes never use a tar brush.

Not until state Rep. Dewey Crump made his spectacular appearance on the Capitol's third floor was there any rational reason for instituting ethics oversight. There had been a handful of legislators over a long period of time who had exchanged their pin-stripe suits for more somber prison gray outfits, but even these few most often guilty of misconduct beyond the parameters of public office. A few executive department officials had abused their offices, but for the most part their misconduct was so obvious even an Inspector Cluseau would have caught on.

Why penalize hundreds, perhaps thousands, for the misdeeds of a handful? Dewey Crump provided the answer, because he abused the trust of his peers and behaved in a manner that, while often appearing bizarre, was nevertheless within the acceptable boundaries of political conduct. After Dewey, there was no turning back.

The hard part came when it was time to devise the boundaries that Crump had exceeded. For the 197 members of the branch where the war was to be waged, there were almost 197 ways of providing oversight. This surplus has been narrowed somewhat, but disagreement among the legislative ranch and between the three branches still remains. Shall Missouri have an oversight commission with broad or limited powers? Who will appoint the members? From whence should come the potential commission candidates? Who will investigate the alleged violators? Even when the legislators answer these questions, will the executive branch approve? Will the courts uphold the statute's provision? Jefferson City will try to answer these questions in the final two weeks of the first session of the 86th General Assembly.

The problem with the ethics law passed in the final minutes of last year's session, an action that was made in response to the threat of an initiative petition, is that it called only for income disclosure from practically everyone in state government who had the power to sign his or her name. The questions asked under the present law were so general, and so vague, as to be innocuous in revealing any kind of wrongdoing.

While it is important to have some means of checking non-compliance with rules and regulations, it is much more important to establish rules that meet the requirements of all three branches of government. Police officers don't make up the laws they enforce; they see that rules enacted by others are followed. In the time remaining in this year's session, we urge members to enact the ethics standards they believe will help insure the public's trust in this state's political process. The rules need not be expansive: ethical conduct means following a few hard and fast laws that are neither arcane nor ambivalent. To wit:

1. No public official, elected or appointed, shall violate any statute that applies to the general public.

2. No public official shall receive any gift of any value for performance of official duties.

3. All state elected officials, and all appointed department, division and agency directors, will file copies of their annual 1040 income tax forms with an ethics commission. No detail of these forms shall be made public at any time, and any violation of this law will be punishable by a fine or prison term or both.

With passage of these three rules, Missourians could have the most ethical state government in America, perhaps in the world. The rules permit neither evasion nor witch hunts. It is cynical to say some ethics proponents have a higher priority for either one or the other, but it is also probably accurate to make the observation. In the meantime, we should trust the politicians we trusted after Dewey went to jail.