Introducing ethics reform at Utah Legislature great idea

Have you ever had what you think is a really good idea, and then you pick up some news source and see it?

Well, perhaps great minds think alike (or maybe he just got lucky), but my former Deseret News colleague and boss, LaVarr Webb, has suggested in his Utah Policy Daily newsletter something I've been thinking about for months:

If Utah GOP leaders are smart, they would introduce the Utahns for Ethical Government citizen initiative petition in the 2010 Legislature.

They'd introduce it word for word.

And then, through a series of public hearings and amendments they would change the UEG initiative to something that a majority of legislators want.

Now, the final product (or products, for it would likely take several bill or rule changes) would not look much like an initiative petition does today. But that final product would say, in clear terms, what legislators would accept in reforming their own ethical standards and conduct, be it campaign contribution limits, lobbyist gifts, an independent ethics commission or their official Code of Conduct.

And then Utahns could see the new laws and rules passed by the 2010 Legislature, match those with the initiative, and see if they want the more strict initiative or believe legislators have gone far enough on their own.

If done properly, it could be an apple-to-apple comparison.

And it could also be a brilliant political move.

Because for 45 days in the general session, which starts in late January, GOP legislators could be detailing day-by-day, point-by-point, why the UEG initiative goes too far, and how their own ethics reforms makes more sense.

You couldn't buy that kind of anti-initiative press.

Plus, through the amendment process, GOP leaders could force their Democratic colleagues to come out for or against many of the initiative's key provisions.

Democrats say they want an independent ethics commission? Fine, do they want the initiative's commission or the one now proposed by the Legislature's own Ethics Interim Study Committee?

Democrats say they want a tougher code of ethics for lawmakers? Fine, do they want the initiative's code — very detailed, even down to prohibiting legislators from swearing in public — or do they want a more general code?

Democrats say they want less special interest influence in politics? Fine, do they want the strict campaign limits in the initiative or much higher limits that may or may not harm their own campaign fundraising?

And so on and so on.

In the end, GOP leaders could politically gut the initiative — that is, they could get many of the sitting Democrats to favor the Republicans' idea of ethics reform rather than the initiative's.