Controversies bring push for more ethics laws

(David Kamerman/Globe Staff file)

Under one proposal, lawmakers would have to undergo ethics training every two years, like college freshmen being repeatedly reminded not to cheat on exams.

Under another plan, legislators would be subject to term limits, and earmarks - the grease that helps the budget get passed every year - would disappear.

As Massachusetts deals with its biggest corruption scandals and ethics controversies in decades, everyone from the governor to rank-and-file lawmakers is trying to respond to the public's growing distrust by offering a slew of proposals to tighten ethics laws.

"I haven't seen this much clamoring for change since the early '90s in the general area of ethics," said Pam Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts and a mem ber of the governor's task force. "We need more openness, we need more accountability, we need stronger structures that create the best behavior. And we need our lobbyists to be reporting what they do."

With state and federal investigators trying to shine light on the culture at the State House, political leaders say they want greater transparency. Governor Deval Patrick has formed a 12-member task force to recommended changes, while two lawmakers have put out a 12-point plan. House Republicans have formed a three-member study group. Senate leaders are working on yet another package.

Representative Jennifer M. Callahan, a Democrat from Sutton, announced that she, too, will file legislation on ethics and lobbying reform.

Callahan in recent months has leveled charges that she was punished politically - and verbally threatened - for not committing to House Ways and Means chairman Robert A. DeLeo's effort to collect votes to become House speaker. The verbal threat was referred to the House Ethics Committee, but the work of the committee is confidential and whatever decisions it made - if any - have not been made public. Callahan said confidentiality requirements prohibit her from commenting on the incident, although her legislation would make the work of the Ethics Committee more public.

"The actions of a few have brought an incredible broad-brush tarnish to the institution," Callahan said in an interview. "About the second or third question from constituents now is, 'What is going on on Beacon Hill? What kind of a mess are we embroiled in?' "

Beacon Hill has long been known for its closed-door culture. Deals are made in private, and some committee votes are even taken via Blackberry and e-mail. Power is concentrated in the hands of a few, with rank-and-file lawmakers afraid to mount public challenges of leadership for fear of being punished. And because the Legislature exempted itself decades ago from the state's open-meeting and public records laws, lawmakers often deliberate in private and keep key documents hidden from public view.

Most of the talk of reform so far is lofty, but specifics are few.

Callahan's legislation would preclude lobbyists from contributing to any political campaigns or paying for trips or events attended by lawmakers; strip members from their chairmanships if they are fined by the state Ethics Commission or Office of Campaign and Political Finance; and mandate all lawmakers attend an "Ethics Education and Training Seminar" each legislative session.

Representatives John Quinn, Democrat of Dartmouth, and Martin Walsh, Democrat of Dorchester, issued a plan to be included in legislation in January. The plan includes putting a six-year term limit on the speaker's job, public meetings of the House Ethics Committee, and increased penalties for illegal lobbying. It would also restrict the use of earmarks in the state budget.

"There's all these different issues swirling around Beacon Hill, and the public is looking at us," Walsh said in an interview. "I love the profession I'm in and I value the profession I'm in. But the reputation to the profession is damaged a bit. Should we have acted earlier? Maybe."

Patrick's task force, charged with developing major ethics reform legislation to make government more transparent, began meeting last week - in private. The initial meeting of the task force was not open to the public, although the group will hold a public hearing at the State House on Dec. 3.

The task force is examining whether current ethics laws are clear enough, whether the state's investigatory tools should be strengthened, and whether penalties for violations should be raised. The governor is concerned, said Ben Clements, who is Patrick's chief legal counsel and is leading the task force, about whether or not the public "feels confident there are sufficient controls in place to assure confidence in government."

The State House has been rocked in recent weeks by scandal. In the course of five days, two senators resigned. James Marzilli, who was accused of accosting four women in Lowell in June, resigned after it was revealed that he represented the Massachusetts Senate in October at an energy conference in Germany. Dianne Wilkerson resigned last week a day after she was indicted by a federal grand jury on eight counts of attempted extortion stemming from an undercover FBI operation. The Roxbury Democrat is accused of accepting $23,500 in bribes to help secure a liquor license for a nightclub in her district and to push legislation for a development on state land in Roxbury.

In addition, several House lawmakers face ongoing investigations by multiple agencies over business deals and connections with lobbyists. Most prominent is DiMasi, who is the subject of an Ethics Commission probe and whose close friends have been the focus of several ongoing inquiries, including a state grand jury investigation. A state computer software contractor made $2 million in payments to three of his close associates. One of the speaker's associates who received payments, his personal accountant, Richard Vitale, gave DiMasi a highly unusual third mortgage on his North End condominium.

DiMasi, who has refused to respond to a subpoena for records from the Ethics Commission, has maintained that Massachusetts already has one of the strictest laws in the country.

"The speaker has been very clear that while Massachusetts already has among the toughest ethics laws in the country, if necessary changes are proposed, they will of course be considered," said his spokesman, David Guarino.

Senate President Therese Murray has also not been entirely enthusiastic about new reforms, with her only comment so far being a one-sentence statement that she is "open to looking at any meaningful changes to ethics laws." Her spokesman, David Falcone, said the Senate is working on its own proposals for change but that it remained a work in progress last week and was not ready to be released.

Massachusetts ranked 20th overall in the nation on its openness and ethics laws, according to an index released last month by the Better Government Association. The rankings took into account laws in each state on limits to campaign contributions, transparency laws, and penalties for ethics violations.

Massachusetts ranked 42d in open records laws; 28th in whistleblower laws; 2d in campaign finance laws; 37th in open meetings laws; and 13th in conflict-of-interest laws.

In the early 1990s, widespread changes were made to the state's campaign finance laws, including limiting contributions to $500, banning lobbyists from providing gifts, and requiring lawmakers to file electronic disclosures.

The last time there was such a widespread movement for change, however, was in the 1970s. A special commission was formed, and became named after its chairman, John William Ward.

Following a nearly three-year-long inquiry, the commission's final report was blunt in its findings.

"We have learned that corruption is a way of life in Massachusetts," it stated in more than 2,000 pages.

The report also said that its reforms would hopefully "create a future in the political life of Massachusetts where there would never again be the need for a special commission to investigate corruption and maladministration."

Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.