Rarely does an ethics commission get a clear chance to show it has no
favoritism. The Nevada Commission on Ethics will soon get that chance.<br>
<br>

On the legislative immunity front, according to <a href="http://www.projo.com/generalassembly/Irons_ethics_case_01-21-09_SID1GAH…; target="”_blank”">an
article in the Providence <span>Journal,</span></a>
a date has been set for the Rhode Island Supreme Court to hear the

Thumbs up for the Virginia House of Delegates General Laws Committee.
According
to <a href="http://www.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/opinion/op_ed/article/bill_aims_f…; target="”_blank”">an

Another cause for my last blog entry, on the three lies of government
ethics, is that I had just
finished F. G. Bailey's book <span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Prevalence-Deceit-F-G-Bailey/dp/0801497736/ref=sr…; target="”_blank”">The
Prevalence of Deceit</a></span> (Cornell, 1991). The book is about the

Everyone knows the three lies jokes. Every topic has its three lies,
and the third one is the punch line. Unfortunately, in government
ethics there aren't any punch lines, but there are lies, or at least
common rhetoric that isn't true, what I will refer to as "untruths."
Those who believe in effective government ethics programs need to be
ready to respond to them when they arise.<br>
<br>

There's a lot of talk among government ethics practitioners about how
important it is for ethics commissions to have teeth, that is, the
ability to at least reprimand and fine government officials for ethics
violations. Requiring council approval of ethics recommendations brings elected officials into the ethics process and politicizes it. And politicizing an ethics program undermines
its goal of gaining the public's trust in elected officials to govern
for the public, not for themselves and their families, friends, and

The conclusion of <a href="http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20090225/COLUMNIST/902250326&quot; target="”_blank”">an
op-ed column</a> in today's Sarasota <span>Herald-Tribune</span>
about the mess in Venice that <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/652&quot; target="”_blank”">I wrote about yesterday</a>

A favorite ploy in local government ethics is for a council to vote for
an ethics code that includes an ethics commission, and then either not
actually appoint members to the commission or, when they resign, not
fill their seats, so that there is, effectively, no enforcement
mechanism.<br>
<br>
But a legislative body cannot do this when it self-enforces. It has to be more creative. The

<i>Update below</i><br>
Recently, <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/634&quot; target="”_blank”">I wrote</a> a
bit about the odd Venice, FL ethics program, which
puts the city manager completely in charge. Now Venice is making news
with respect to open government issues, and this has led to a very
interesting conflict of interest issue.<br>
<br>

I've always felt torn with respect to whether citizens should be
allowed to ask for advisory opinions that have to do with local
government officials, as can be seen in the<a href="http://www.cityethics.org/mc/full#TOC57&quot; target="”_blank”"> advisory opinion
provision and comments</a> in the City Ethics Model Code Project.<br>
<br>