News. Debate. Community. Levers for a better democracy.
Government Ethics

A new report from the Coalition for Integrity scored states based on the transparency of their ethics enforcement.

Report: Few states shine in their transparency of ethics enforcement

Only a handful of states earned high marks in a new report analyzing the enforcement power and transparency of state ethics agencies.

The researchers behind "Enforcement of Ethics Rules by State Agencies" surveyed 2018 enforcement statistics for every state ethics agency and scored states by how well those agencies made their actions publicly available. The study was released last week by the nonprofit Coalition for Integrity, which works to combat corruption in both governments and business.

Four states — Colorado, Florida, Minnesota and Rhode Island — received perfect scores for transparency in part because their agencies publish annual reports detailing the number of ethics complaints received and how those complaints were investigated and resolved in a format that's both publicly available and easy to understand, the group said.

But almost half the states in the country — 23 of them — earned failing grades (50 percent or below on a 100-point scale) in terms of transparency. And eight more were excluded from the study altogether because they didn't have state ethics agencies in 2018 (Arizona, Idaho, New Mexico, North Dakota and Wyoming) or had agencies with "limited or no investigative or sanctioning power" (Utah, Vermont and Virginia).

The states that scored poorly on ethics transparency did so for a variety of reasons. Failing to hold public proceedings of probable ethics violations, opting not to publish information about violations, and withholding details about sanctions taken against ethics offenders were the most cited reasons in the report.

"The report on Enforcement of Ethics Rules reflects the huge variation in enforcement efforts by state ethics agencies — and the lack of transparency of those efforts in many states," said Shruti Shah, president and CEO of Coalition for Integrity. "In addition to meaningful enforcement actions, state ethics agencies should strive to be transparent and publish information on complaints received, cases resolved, and sanctions issued."

News. Community. Debate. Levers for better democracy.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter.

Ballot measures are good democracy — but only if you can understand them

Marginal improvements have been made to help voters understand the questions posed to them on the ballot this November, a new study concludes, but such ballot measures still favor the college-educated — who represent a minority of the U.S. population.

This year voters in eight states will decide the fate of a collective 36 such propositions. In a study released Thursday, Ballotpedia assessed how easy it is to comprehend what each proposal would accomplish, concluding that the difficulty level had decreased compared with the referendums decided in the last off-year election of 2017 — but not by much.

In fact, according to a pair of well-established tests, 21 of the 36 ballot measures cannot be understood by the 40 percent of the voting-age population who never attended college.

Keep reading... Show less
Balance of Power
teguhjatipras/Getty Images

Two states asking Supreme Court for permission to regulate Electoral College conduct

Colorado has become the second state to ask the Supreme Court to decide if states may legally bind their presidential electors to vote for the candidate who carried their state.

The issue of so-called faithless electors is the latest aspect of an increasingly heated debate about the virtues and flaws of the Electoral College that has blossomed, especially among progressive democracy reform advocates, now that two of the past five presidential winners (Donald Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in 2000) got to the Oval Office despite losing the national popular vote.

Keep reading... Show less