Citizens ethics initiative demands too much from Utah legislators

The authors of the citizens initiative petition on legislative ethics that is currently gathering signatures have set a high bar for lawmakers to clear. A close reading of the 21-page, single-spaced initiative reveals that its drafters have carefully targeted nearly every well-publicized instance of questionable conduct by Utah legislators in recent memory.

I believe the initiative's sponsors deserve credit not only for expending significant time and effort in developing their thoughtful proposal, but also for encouraging debate on a fundamental question: What kind of men and women do we want as our legislators?

Taken as a whole, the initiative's sweeping regulations paint a portrait of a legislator who is required to serve selflessly with no thought of personal gain, who diligently avoids any relationships or pursuits that might compromise his or her obligations to the public, and who scrupulously remains above reproach.

Most people would probably want to do whatever is necessary to have such an ideal legislator represent them. But upon further reflection, the inevitable clash between theory and practice might give them pause.

Legislative service for Utah's 104 lawmakers is what I often describe as a part-time job with no days off. The Utah Constitution very deliberately created the position of part-time citizen-legislator in order to guard against an excessive concentration of power in Utah's Capitol. Nearly all legislators have other full-time employment.

No one acquainted with the Utah House or Senate can deny that lawmakers in the Beehive State perform the vast majority of their service for no compensation.

At this point in the argument, proponents of the ethics initiative typically respond that any legislator who feels under-compensated, underappreciated or threatened by the initiative should simply resign to make way for other citizens who possess a greater spirit of selflessness or voluntarism.

In jumping so hastily to this conclusion, the ethics proponents ignore the possibility that their initiative may be structurally flawed in failing to make the responsibilities of legislative office commensurate with its costs.

I have probably read the lengthy ethics initiative three dozen times now, and each time I do, I am left with the distinct impression that it is asking me to take a vow similar to one who enters a monastery or convent.

While I personally may be willing to pledge such devotion to my legislative duties, and have voluntarily adopted most of the practices required by the initiative since I first ran for office, I am not sure that Utahns would want to hold all their senators and representatives to such rigorous standards.