MISSOURI WATCH: WHITHER OUR ETHICS?

Having recently spent hours pouring over quite literally hundreds of pages and thousands of entries at the office of the Missouri Ethics Commission, I have regretfully reached the conclusion there is probably nothing that can to done to guarantee the public of the good conduct of its elected officials. I reach the decision with considerable anguish, but more importantly, with even greater fear.

Let me explain that the current statutes, as well as the rules and regulations of the Ethics Commission, are being followed and observed. The law requires financial disclosures from our elected officials that are rather comprehensive, and as far as I can determine, those completing the forms have done so in a forthright and honest manner. To be perfectly frank, I have on occasion been embarrassed to read these reports, for they reveal information that the average citizens wouldn't be willing to disclose to any save the closet of friends or relatives, and most certainly wouldn't be willing to list for anyone who simply walks in from the street and claims to be a member of the news media.

I suppose financial disclosures are necessary, although it is difficult to see how any state employee whose job it is to inspect them could learn anything incriminating. Even the U.S. Constitution protects citizens from self-incrimination, a right that many an elected official must have recalled as he or she completed the required financial data.

As a member of the news media who has always attempted to protect innocent citizens from unnecessary and embarrassing publicity, I find the financial disclosures unnecessary to the degree that information provided is most embarrassing to those whose financial holdings are small to almost non-existent and almost superfluous for those with medium to large incomes.

There may be compelling reasons for these returns, but there is absolutely no guarantee that they are completely accurate.

The second category required of all candidates for public office in Missouri is a summary of campaign contributions received during a specified period of time. Reading these reports is only slightly more informative that financial disclosures, given the large number filed in the offices of the Ethics Commission and the myriad of details provided. While these ask for totals and large contributors, the reader has no reason to suspect, one way or the other, whether the totals are correct or whether all major contributors have been listed. A suspicious reporter can logically conclude that incriminating information has be omitted. Perhaps, giving all parties the benefit of the doubt, pertinent data has simply been forgotten.

A third category of reports required by the law is a listing of all lobbyists, as well as a detailed accounting of their expenses while in pursuit of their lobbying activities. Reading hundreds of pages, bearing a listing of several hundred persons who have earned the designation of lobbyist, these reports are a keystone of recent attempts to assure Missourians of the honest and integrity of their public servants. All who believe this had been accomplished, please gather for your annual convention in a telephone booth.

As for lobbyist expenses, it is remarkable how so many engaged in roaming the corridors of the capitol actually spend so little in pursuit of their special interests. The highest amount listed in any detail that was expended by a recognizable professional lobbyists is a few hundred dollars. Such innocent items as dinner for a member of the General Assembly or drinks for a couple of House or Senate members constitute the vast bulk of these expense reports. The reporter who believes he will find a clue to unethical or illegal behavior from these reports is doomed to disappointment and failure.

It is quite possible to evade or hedge information on these three reports and still escape all but the most complete and comprehensive investigation. To be perfectly honest, it is impossible to comply with the statutes and still benefit financially from special-interest payoffs. It is possible for lobbyists to hide illegal gifts by having someone else bestow the bounty, and it's possible for the recipient to designate another member of the family to receive it.

It's time for both public officials and the press to stop pretending Missourians are assured of impeccable ethics under existing statutes. It just ain't so.

~Jack Stapleton is a Kennett columnist who keeps tabs on government in Jefferson City.