U.S. ATTORNEYS MUST GET APPROVAL FOR POLITICAL ACTIVITY; SHOULD THEY DO IT PRIVATELY INSTEAD?

Thanks in large part to pressure from U.S. Sen. Christopher Bond of Missouri, the Justice Department has tightened rules on the involvement of federal prosecutors in state or local ballot initiatives.

The changes are prompted by the actions of Edward Dowd Jr. and Stephen L. Hill Jr., both U.S. attorneys who campaigned against a statewide measure that would have allowed qualified Missourians to carry concealed weapons.

Voters narrowly defeated Proposition B in April 1999 with 51.8 percent voting against. Although Proposition B enjoyed wide support outstate, opposition from urban areas was key to the defeat.

Dowd and Hill sent letters opposing Proposition B to newspapers and law enforcement officers around the state. The mailings were on official Justice Department letterhead and sent at department expense.

Bond, a Proposition B supporter, asked the department to look into the attorneys' actions. Although an investigation concluded there was no wrongdoing, the department changed its policy to require prosecutors to make a written request and receive approval prior to getting involved in ballot initiatives.

This is a step in the right direction, but whether federal prosecutors should ever take an official stance and use the power of their position to influence state ballot items remains questionable.

If Dowd and Hill as private citizens who happen to be U.S. attorneys want to take sides in a campaign, that is their right. But to use taxpayer resources to further their personal views, while legal, is certainly inappropriate.