Panel tightens rules on politics

The State Ethics Commission has tightened its rules on political activity by public officials, barring them from writing stump speeches, answering campaign questions, or holding news conferences on political topics inside the State House or other state office buildings.

The advisory released last Thursday dramatically expanded the Ethics Commission's restrictions on the use of public resources for political purposes. ''Elected officials should take appropriate steps to keep separate official and political activities and to ensure that political and campaign activities take place outside of their public offices," the commission wrote.

For years, the commission has said the state conflict-of-interest law prohibits public officials from using public resources to gain an ''unwarranted privilege." But previously, the commission cited fewer and more generic restrictions, barring use of office supplies and the state seal for political activities. It did not explicitly prohibit politically centered news conferences or political speeches.

At the State House, the state's most political building, the advisory yesterday took politicians, consultants, and watchdogs by surprise, and they suggested it could be unworkable. Removing politics from the building would be ''like baking cake without flour," said one. Another said the public would be the loser because elected officials would be able to sidestep reporters' questions, claiming they were political.

An Ethics Commission spokeswoman, Carol Carson, said the agency released the opinion now because of the onset of a new campaign season. The advisory makes no mention of violations, but Democrats and Republicans yesterday each accused the other of previous misconduct that led the commission to clarify the state's conflict of interest law.

''I'm delighted. We feel completely vindicated," said Philip Johnston, chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, which nearly two years ago filed complaints with the Ethics Commission alleging violations by Governor Mitt Romney.

The Democratic party and state Representative James J. Marzilli Jr., an Arlington Democrat, accused Romney of violating the conflict law when he appeared outside his State House office in July 2004, flanked by the state flag and several aides, and criticized John Kerry's choice of John Edwards as his running mate.

''Governor Romney never should have used public resources for political purposes," charged Johnston. ''Now the Ethics Commission has made their position clear -- it is illegal to do so in the future. At the time, the governor's office shrugged off our complaint and said it was simply partisan sniping signifying nothing. In fact, it turns out it was quite substantive. I'm pleasantly surprised. It's been a long time, but it's pretty clear what happened here."

Romney's spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom, refused yesterday to comment on the advisory or Johnston's assertion that it was aimed at the governor.

Johnston and Marzilli had filed a similar complaint with the state Office of Campaign and Political Finance, which ruled in April 2005 that the governor had broken no laws. ''The campaign finance law does not preclude the governor from responding to questions regarding issues of the day and it is reasonable for his staff to respond to the press corps and notify them of an availability in advance," wrote OCPF director Michael J. Sullivan to Romney's chief legal counsel.

Some Republicans privately charged that attorney general Thomas F. Reilly and several Democratic legislators have held political news conferences at their government offices. For example, they said, Reilly was in his state office when he commented on Romney's decision not to seek reelection last December. A Reilly spokeswoman, Meredith Baumann, declined to comment on the accusation.

Many public officials do take steps to keep their politics and state business separate. Romney, for example, has rented private office space for his Commonwealth political action committee, as he weighs a run for president. Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey and Reilly hold political news conferences at their campaign headquarters, away from the State House.

Several consultants, including two former gubernatorial press secretaries, said the advisory could significantly change the way public officials deal with the media. It is not uncommon for the governor or lieutenant governor to answer a broad range of questions, including political ones, at State House press conferences. But, under the new rules, once political questions dominate the news conference, it must be stopped. ''The press officer should conclude the interview by referring the media representative to the campaign for further discussion," the advisory says.

''If the Ethics Commission intends to stop all political lines of questioning for elected officials inside the State House, that's ridiculous and impractical," said Rob Gray, a Republican consultant and press secretary to former governors William F. Weld and A. Paul Cellucci. ''These are elected officials. That in and of itself means there is a crossover between policy and politics. Stifling reporters' questions only lets elected officials off the hook. What's an elected official going to say when a reporter asks a political question -- 'Hey everybody get your coats and meet me at the corner of Beacon and Park streets and I'll answer the question.' It's silly."

House minority leader Bradley H. Jones Jr., a Republican from North Reading, said the advisory ''answers one set of questions but raises another." It's not always clear what is political and what is policy, he said.

''If you get a question from a reporter about the president or a ballot question or a candidate for office, what is legitimate to talk about? I don't think reporters would be too happy if you say, 'I can't talk about that. It may be related to a campaign,' " he said.

''Some things are clear," Jones said. ''You don't sit in your office on the phone soliciting campaign donations. You don't tell your staff to drive over and pick up a donation. But then there are shades of gray. You park your car in the State House garage and you have a bumper sticker on your car advertising a candidate. Is that political? Is that a violation?"

Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts, also said the advisory leaves some questions unanswered. For example, a section of the advisory that bars politicking by public employees during ''normal working hours" does not define normal working hours for elected officials, leaving the rule open to broad interpretation, she said.

''It could imply that holding a charity golf tournament during work hours is acceptable and would not be prohibited," said Wilmot, who said removing politics from the State House is ''like baking cake without flour. The separation between governing and politics isn't a natural one for politicians," she said. ''Where rules can be defined up front, the easier it is for candidates themselves and the public to know what is expected."

The Ethics Commission document, circulated to state lawyers in the last several days, is considered advice to public officials. Anyone who violates the conflict-of-interest law may be fined up to $2,000 per violation.

The commission may also refer violations to the attorney general or district attorneys for criminal prosecution.

Andrea Estes can be reached at estes@globe.com.