Reader comments
The fight for ethics reform
9 comments | Read story
Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In Opinion
Across Site
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- Michael Gerson: Egypt's craziness is...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- Readers' forum: Incorporate Millcreek
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Readers' forum: Teachers came first
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
In Opinion
Across Site
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
- Readers' forum: Teachers came first
- Readers' forum: Rights of conscience
In Opinion
Across Site
- Obama's assault on the poor
62 - Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
53 - Letters: Bush's failed policies
52 - Letters: A changing Constitution
32 - Letters: Teachers not overpaid
30 - Letters: Home equity loans
28 - Letters: Rights of conscience
25 - Economic chaos ahead
25 - GOP no longer leads on defense
24 - Editorial: Rights of conscience
23







You can see the hypocrisy when the self-righteous Pat Jones preaches a complete ban on gifts and then gets busted for taking concert tickets from lobbyists.
If that happens then the common folk have to compete for "access". Money or gifts should not buy access.
Assess should be either equal to all, or where there is an important cause that needs more access, that cause should get the increased access because it is important, not because of gifts.
If I had my way, there would be no campaign contributions. The state would provide a web site for all canidates, local media, would provide a forum if they choose to. This way a canidate is beholden only to the common good and what ever biases they broght in, but nothing additional beyong that.
Regular people should not have to compete for attention with lobbiests who are willing to give gifts.
Ideally the common good should be the only motivation of a legislator.
Every individual legislator I have talked to about this has said that gifts doesn't make a difference how they vote. It may be true for some, or at least they believe it is true, but I doubt is true for all. I believe gifts do make a difference just as advertising does.
I would much prefer that the legislators motives remain as pure as possible and that access to people not able or willing to give a gift does not get crowded out by lobbiests who do give gifts.
Words should mean something to a newspaper. Why not just be more accurate. Maybe your shabby reputation among those in the know would improve.