We're wondering how many Utahns think it's OK that former state House speaker Greg Curtis gets to take the almost $400,000 left over in his campaign accounts and do with it as he pleases, whether that means giving it to charity or simply pocketing it. How many people think it's OK for other unsuccessful candidates or retiring lawmakers to do the same with much lesser amounts that still add up to tens of thousands of dollars?
We're guessing most people would find such an idea distasteful. They may even wonder how Utah, a state that likes to pride itself on its conservative and values-driven work ethic, could allow such a thing.
Retiring Sen. Dan Eastman told this newspaper he thinks it's OK to let lawmakers do as they please with leftover money because, "You elect honorable people, and they will use it in honorable ways." If that were always the case, people might have no need to worry. But of course, Utah's Legislature is a body of human beings, and they tend to act in similar ways as other human beings — some honorably, some not.
People donate to campaigns for many reasons, but most have something to do with furthering an agenda or gaining influence in the public arena, not with enriching individuals.
For the record, Curtis has in the past said he won't keep any of his leftover money for himself but will instead donate it to charity, other candidates or the Republican Party. Eastman also will donate to charity and politicians and possibly keep some for himself, he said.
They didn't create the current system that allows such freedom with campaign funds. But a majority of lawmakers have consistently stood in the way of changes that would limit personal enrichment. That, we hope, is about to change.
Rep. Dave Clark, R-Santa Clara, is the new House speaker. He has proposed a series of ethics reforms that, if enacted, would go far toward instilling a greater sense of public confidence in state lawmakers. One of these proposals is to limit the things a retiring lawmaker could do with his leftover funds. Charities, candidates or political causes would be OK. Personal pocketbooks would not. He also would ban lawmakers from accepting most gifts, including free meals. And he would institute a one-year waiting period from the time a person leaves office until he or she can become a registered lobbyist.
These are common-sense reforms. They are similar to what Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has proposed. We hope this push from people in power finally shakes loose the opposition that has kept such reforms from serious consideration in the past.
Money tends to be a legitimate concern in a part-time citizen legislature. The men and women who serve do so often by sacrificing some of the money they otherwise would make at their full-time jobs. We support a healthy increase in the $15,000 or so state lawmakers receive in pay and expenses for their efforts. That might make a reasonable trade-off for the loss of other liberties with donations and gifts.