The Salt Lake Olympics are going well, it seems, with just one flaw — the judging of the ice skating pairs competition.
The problem isn't a terrorist attack, thank goodness, or traffic jams or even boorish sports columnists. It's an apparent ethical breach. When the judges took the oath in the opening ceremonies to be fair, a few weren't listening.
Anyone can hear the yelling over the pairs results: If votes were traded by the judges, it's outlandish, unacceptable, just plain wrong. And something must be done about it.
The ice skating world — and to some extent the Olympic movement — will once again go through a soul-searching.
As with the bid scandal here and in other countries who got the Games in the 1990s, the question of appearance of wrongdoing will be weighed against the actual evidence of wrongdoing.
Some members of the Utah Legislature are about to face the same kinds of questions.
Not from the media, nor from some government watchdog groups, which have been dismissed as meddling nay-sayers by many legislators.
Republican lawmakers may well be questioned — and asked to sign pledges of support — over various government reform issues. Whether that effort will bear any fruit remains to be seen. But a vortex is forming that could break the ethical logjam.
And it will be interesting to watch.
Glen Davis — you may remember him as the conservative who shocked Gov. Mike Leavitt and the GOP establishment in 2000 by forcing Leavitt into a Republican primary — has put together a list of government reform items he wants rank-and-file Republicans to act upon.
Davis nearly got the state Republican Central Committee to adopt the seven-point resolution two weeks ago. After some lively debate, I'm told, the vote was 42-42. Joe Cannon, state GOP chairman, had to break the tie. Cannon voted no, and Davis' attempts failed.
But Davis is not giving up.
He said this week he and his supporters — an as-yet unknown number of county and state delegates — will take the reform resolutions to Republican county and state conventions this spring.
Under party rules, rank-and-file delegates can move resolutions and change party bylaws and constitutions from the convention floor.
Convention delegates, over the years, have proven a conservative lot. And Davis' reform measures may have a real shot of passing.
And if the reform items Davis presented in the Central Committee become part of county and state sentiments, GOP lawmakers who refuse to act on like ideas during the 2003 and 2004 Legislatures will open themselves up for criticism.
Davis admits there are no real ways to force legislators to vote any certain way.
But regardless of GOP legislators' philosophical beliefs on core issues — like gun control — it's clear they take on the conservative elements of the party at their own risk.
Assuming he gets his reform issues officially adopted, Davis says he and others will be watching Republican legislators on those matters — tallying up how they are performing.
"It is not if you say you are a Republican" when you run for office, says Davis, "but how you govern as a Republican" after elected. The old RINO argument — Republican in Name Only.
As I've written a number of times before, I really don't understand legislators' stubbornness in refusing to adopt some reform measures. Some examples:
While hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent by lobbyists in entertaining each year, some of that goes to non-legislative public officials. And even that spent on lawmakers often comes in receptions, dinners, lunches and so on for all 104 part-time legislators. In other words, individual legislators don't think they really get that much from lobbyists.
You constantly hear: "What's the big deal?" Well, if it's not a big deal, why not just give it up?
Why complain about news stories tying lawmakers to expensive Jazz tickets? Just don't take any Jazz tickets. Like the rest of Utahns they represent, if a legislator can't afford to buy his own ticket to a Jazz game, watch it on TV rather than take a $100 ticket from someone whose job it is to influence you.
What is so terrible about restricting legislators from becoming a paid lobbyist for a year or two after leaving office?
Those who leave office and immediately become lobbyists are, clearly, trading on their legislative connections and knowledge. It appears legislators refuse to act on the "revolving-door" issue because they want at least the option of making some quick money after leaving office — not a very pretty picture.
Why not restrict or ban the personal use of campaign funds? The money was given — one would hope — to get a legislator elected, not to buy her new clothes, repair his car or provide a new computer. And certainly when a legislator retires from office with $5,000 or $10,000 in his account — money he may have raised for a year or three never intending to run again — he shouldn't be able to just give that money to himself. Such self-enrichment hurts every legislator's reputation.
It looks like the questions of government reform are closing in on GOP legislators. Perhaps Davis' effort will fail. But some diehard opponents to reform in the Republican legislative caucuses may start looking over their shoulders, wondering just how safe they are from intra-party challenges over the next few years.
Deseret News political editor Bob Bernick Jr. may be reached by e-mail at bbjr@desnews.com