Utah fails in the center's evaluation because it doesn't require much specificity in legislators' financial disclosers or conflict of interest reports.

For example, lawmakers' spouses and children don't have to be listed — lawmakers may choose to do so — nor does a legislator's employer, or the employers of immediate family members. The donors to campaigns don't have to list their professions or employers, either.

Lacking all of the above, and more, makes it difficult for Utah citizens to see conflict of interest connections between donations and the accepting legislators.

Utah lawmakers do have to file conflict of interest statements, separate from any campaign finance reports.

But, again, Utah was ranked down because those conflict reports don't require specific data that is mandatory in some other states, such as the names of any clients professional lawmakers may have, or even the names of the businesses that employ lawmakers.

Last year, GOP House leaders said they wanted significant ethics reform from the 2009 Legislature. But in the end, lawmakers tightened only some areas, ignored others and said they would study a few more.

E-MAIL: bbjr@desnews.com