<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Unified_Theory&quot; target="”_blank”">According
to Wikipedia</a>, a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) is "a model in
particle physics in which at high energy, the three gauge
interactions of the Standard Model which define the electromagnetic,
weak, and strong interactions, are merged into one single
interaction."<br>
<br>

Can anyone volunteer for a local political campaign without it being considered a contribution? Isn't it
everyone's right to do so? Isn't this just about the most important
thing a citizen can do, short of running for office herself?<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://metronews.ca/news/toronto/976216/lobbyist-warren-kinsella-workin…; target="”_blank”">the

Worth reading is <a href="http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/weaning-players-off-the-public-…; target="”_blank”">an op-ed piece Saturday in the Canberra <i>Times</i></a> by Jack Waterford,
the paper's editor-at-large. With a title you'd never
see in an American paper — Weaning Players Off the Public Teat —
Waterford takes a very frank approach to the revolving door between

I just finished reading the classic political science book <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=-L99RHLc3WoC&quot; target="”_blank”"><i>Who Governs?
Democracy and Power in an American City</i></a> by Robert A. Dahl
(Yale University Press, 1961). It might have been the second time
around, because I did take an Urban Politics course forty years ago. The book happens to focus on
New Haven, the city in whose suburbs I live and whose public

Consent agendas, also known as consent calendars, are an excellent
way to get around the disclosure of conflicts (and, as Dallas showed
us in 2011, to amend ethics provisions without a discussion (see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/dallas-council-facilitates-pay-play-s…; target="”_blank”">my
blog post on this</a>)).<br>
<br>

While researching my last blog post, I visited the webpage of
Tallahassee mayor John Marks, and was thrown for a bit of a loop.
The first two paragraphs of <a href="http://www.talgov.com/commission/commission-officials-marks.aspx&quot; target="”_blank”">his
bio</a> look more like an advertisement for his law firm
than the bio of a mayor:<blockquote>

The story of state legislative interference with local government
ethics programs in Florida continues with a newly amended bill in
the state senate (SB 1474 is attached; see below), sponsored by senator Joe
Abruzzo, whose antagonism to the Palm Beach County ethics program
has been the subject of three City Ethics blog posts in the past

While I was on vacation last week, the biggest story in local
government ethics appears to have been, once again, in the District
of Columbia. According to <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/washingtondc/press-releases/2014/businessman-pleads-…; target="”_blank”">a
press release from the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia</a>

What should be done when an official withdraws from
participation in a matter and gives a reason for withdrawal that appears to
be false? Why would an official provide a false reason for
withdrawal? There are at least two possible reasons:  (1) the
real conflict situation would look worse than the given conflict
situation, or (2) the real reason is that the official doesn't want
to anger the people on either side of the matter, that is, the
official really wants to abstain, but doesn't want to be seen as a

"Why hire a lawyer to do an internal investigation? It’s because you
get the privileges. Otherwise, you’d save a little money and hire a
consultant or accountant." These are the wise words of Bruce A. Green, Director of the Louis Stein Center for Law and
Ethics at Fordham Law School, as quoted <a href="http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/03/jp-morganmadoff-case-puts-spotli…; target="”_blank”">in