Paul Kostyu: Blame Ohio lawmakers, not Frances Strickland

From RH Jones, July 26, 2007
Subject: A need to identify lawmakers

To Paul Kostyu and all:

"Kudos" again journalist Paul Kostyu for keeping politicians held responsible. His article [below] in the Canton Repository, concerning the "D" grade Ohio received from the Center for Public Integrity pointed out that: So the fault for the low grade lies not with Ohio's first lady but with the lawmakers who have allowed a large loophole in the financial-disclosure law when it comes to the executive branch.[Click here for their state-by-state analysis] Hopefully, journalist Kostyu will follow-up this article with one that identifies those Ohio lawmakers guilty of creating the loopholes.

When it comes to such issues, American is kept free by the public's right-to-know transparency; consequently, the specific loophole creating politician, that evades his/her obligation to the public, needs to be held accountable. Could this be another ethics violation that needs scrutiny of the court system?

Here in Ohio the Democratic Caucus has been fighting this sort of thing for years - to no avail. Everytime an ethics bill is up, and they try again to tighten it - their changes are tabled w/o discussion or a vote. Public exposure of any politician, or political party, responsible for ethics violations will force the issue. Unclean politics has no place in Columbus, or in Washington for that matter.

This is my opinion, and that of another person I am not free to identify.

RHJones, a proud CORE member and Leg. CMTE Mem. SummitCRTA

Special interest group rates Strickland "D"
Canton Repository, Tuesday, July 24, 2007
By PAUL E. KOSTYU
gatehouse COLUMBUS BUREAU CHIEF

COLUMBUS Who would have thought that Frances Strickland and her predecessors as Ohio's first lady would be responsible for earning the state a D grade from the Center for Public Integrity. They seem to be such nice, honest people.

Last week, the center, a nonprofit, non-partisan organization based in Washington, D.C., released results of a six-month study that ranked the personal financial disclosure requirements for the nation's 50 governors. Ohio was one of 11 states getting a D, and a low one at that with 61.5 points. Only Washington got an A with 94.5 points. Apparently, the center doesn't grade on a curve. There were eight B's, nine C's and, if my math is correct, 21 F's. At least we are better than Michigan, which had 0 points. Talk about not trying.

BASIC FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

All the F states failed to make available basic information about the private financial interests of their governors, according to the center. Michigan, Idaho, Utah and Vermont do not require their governors to file financial disclosure reports at all. Washington, on the other hand, provides the most complete public information on its governor's personal income.

"As the top elected officials in each state, governors sign legislation into law, recommend and approve state budgets, and have wide-ranging powers to appoint department and agency heads and fill board and commission positions," said Leah Rush, the center's states projects director. "Requiring them to disclose their private financial ties could reveal possible conflicts of interest."

Conflicts of interest? In Ohio? Say it isn't so.

Republicans last week challenged the legality of an executive order by Democrat Gov. Ted Strickland, No. 23, that allows independent home health care workers the option of forming a union that would be recognized by the state. Republicans said Strickland issued the order as a payback for union support in last year's election.

Strickland's first executive order prohibited his wife and executive branch employees from accepting gifts, other than token T-shirts or meals of less than $20, from anyone other than close family members and friends, as long as they're not lobbyists or don't have a contract with the state. Also, folks who receive state contracts or grants worth more than $1,000 must sign a statement saying they won't break ethics law.

SPOUSE'S INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED

Among the 43 questions posed in the center's survey, six dealt with financial disclosure requirements for a governor's spouse. Because Ohio law doesn't require spouse information on employment, investments, real property holdings, client information and whether the spouse is a company director or officer, the state lost 16 points. Those would have catapulted the state to a high C.

The state also lost points because the law doesn't require descriptions or specifics in several categories. And the state lost four points for not allowing or making available filings in an electronic format. One point was subtracted for not publishing a list of delinquent filers.

So the fault for the low grade lies not with Ohio's first lady, but with state lawmakers who have allowed a large loophole in the financial-disclosure law when it comes to the executive branch.

Reach GateHouse Columbus Bureau Chief Paul E. Kostyu at (614) 222-8901 or e-mail: paul.kostyu@cantonrep.com

Other Repository columns by Paul Kostyu

Click here if you wish to contact The Center for Public Integrity about the integrity of this study. KBB