Nothing is more important to an ethics program than ensuring that an
ethics commission is seen as independent, and not a pawn of
politicians. People will not trust the advisory opinions and enforcement decisions of an
ethics commission consisting of people with even presumed ties to politicians. Since trust is the principal goal of an ethics program,
this is unacceptable.<br>
<br>

Maricopa County (home of Phoenix) is doing an excellent job of showing
America's local governments what not to do. In April, I wrote about the conflict
that existed when the county attorney, after representing the county
board of supervisors as it put together plans and contracts for a new
county courthouse, decided to investigate the board's handling of these
plans and contracts. The outcry over this conflict led the county
attorney to turn the investigation over to another county.<br>
<br>

<b>Updates below</b><br>
Anyone who doubts the need for truly independent ethics commissions
need look no further than what has been happening in Philadelphia this
week. Or should I say "this year"?<br>
<br>

I am always fascinated at the ways in which even the most reform-minded
politicians can kill ethics reform proposals that might cause them some
embarrassment. Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has done a great deal for
ethics reform, but at least one reform bill, which on its face seems
pretty minor, has apparently gotten in his craw.<br>
<br>

It seriously undermines the public's understanding of government ethics
when highly visible decisions misrepresent basic government ethics
concepts. This occurred yesterday, when the Alaska State Personnel
Board found that Governor Sarah Palin did not violate the <a href="http://www.law.state.ak.us/pdf/ethics/Statutes-AlaskaExecutiveBranchEth…; target="”_blank”">Alaska

According to <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/06/03/dima…

<b>Update</b> (9/30/09)<br>
I tend to focus a lot on weaknesses of ethics codes, but sometimes
ethics codes go too far. One reason for this is that they are usually
responses to scandals that are criminal in nature, that is, scandals that do not
involve conflicts of interest. Another reason is that most people don't
understand that ethics codes are really conflict of interest codes, not
codes that deal with all of an official's behavior. It's appropriate to

A three-year FBI investigation of Cuyahoga County (which includes
Cleveland) appears to have begun with a sting operation involving
building inspectors, where an undercover agent offered bribes, and they
were accepted, according to <a href="http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2009/05/cuyahoga_county_corruption_inv_…; target="”_blank”">an

In <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/756&quot; target="”_blank”">a  recent blog
post</a>, I wrote about the fining of the executive director of
Philadelphia's board of ethics for violating confidentiality rules.
That blog post focused on dealing responsibly with a possible violation of an ethics code provision (although not actually an ethics provision, but instead a disciplinary rule). Now I would like to focus on confidentiality rules and

Due to President Obama, the word "empathy" is getting tossed around a
lot lately. What interests me is that his definition of the word
"empathy" is central to what ethicists call "moral imagination." And
moral imagination is central to government ethics.<br>
<br>