07 June 2018

Pro Publica: Reporting In The Public Interest . . . What's The Problem Here in Mesa?

Perhaps some day soon - not soon enough perhaps - the public can get engaged and active in the oversight of city government before it's too late.
So far, nothing about Arizona > that can change if they get caught
< Here's a clue to just two
Legislators in Many States Can Push Bills They’d Profit From
by Decca Muldowney
"The laws vary by state. In some, lawmakers are told to recuse themselves from votes that could create even the “appearance of impropriety.” In others, overlapping interests are seen as “almost inevitable. . .
NOTE: This article was produced in partnership with The Advocate, which is a member of the ProPublica Local Reporting Network.
. . . It’s a fundamental part of representative government: Politicians are elected to advocate for their constituents, and not their own interests.
But in many states, laws and ethics rules allow representatives to advance bills that would benefit their own financial interests, as well.
Take Louisiana, where lawmakers only have to recuse themselves if a proposed bill benefits them specifically and no one else, as The Advocate and ProPublica have detailed this week. So, for example, if the owner of a group of nursing homes votes for a bill that would increase profits for his business, but not for other nursing home owners, that would be a conflict of interest. But if the bill increases profit for the entire industry, then it’s acceptable.
Similar language exists in the majority of states, regardless of whether they have full-time, part-time or citizen legislatures. In part-time and citizen legislatures, in which lawmakers are not paid a full salary and often rely on other employment, this means people connected to certain industries or fields are not automatically barred from voting on legislation that might affect them financially. . .
 
at