Is the Council's Proposed Ethics Reform Enough?

Monday, just days after by federal law enforcement agencies, District Council members considered a bill on ethics reform for the 13-person legislative body.

In a blog post today, The Washington Post's Mike DeBonis wrote that the reform efforts could take two paths: the one proposed by current sitting members of the council and another urged by many on the outside who want more far-reaching reform.

In the current leglislation, he explained, Council members seek to work within the laws that exist and to enhance them through better enforcement techniques.

In his monthly newsletter, Council member Jack Evans wrote, "lack of enforcement is the primary problem that I see — we have a number of good laws already on the books, but without adequate enforcement, those rules do us no good."

However, candidates for office and organizations advocating for open government, like DC for Democracy, are critical of Evans' and other sitting members' approach.

DeBonis wrote:

They see a wider ethical rot and want to abolish practices engaged in by people who have not been accused of breaking any laws — spending constituent service money on sports tickets, for instance, or accepting donations from related companies and lobbyists. To this cadre, this bill is more about Jack Evans (D-Ward 2), who appears to walk right up to the edge of the law, than it is about Thomas, who stands accused of blowing past it.

Evans has recently come under scrutiny for spending a large portion of his constituent services funds on professional sports tickets — to the tune of $135,897 since June of 2002.

Evans wrote about the proposed ethics reform before the Council, "I support enhanced disclosure requirements, more rigorous enforcement when violations are discovered, and more meaningful penalties assessed on violators."

But he has not suggested making changes to constituent service funds.