May 16 2008
Aren’t Two Watchdogs Better than One?
On Wednesday, the legislature’s ethics committee agreed to a bill that would prohibit the state auditor from investigating possible violations of the ethics law. Instead, the State Ethics Commission would have sole authority to enforce ethics laws.
Legislative supporters of the bill, mostly Democrats, say their goal is to have a single, unbiased agency to keep an eye on public officials.
But State Auditor Les Merritt, a Republican, argues that it never hurts to have more watchdogs of government officials.
…
Officials in Merritt’s office argue also that giving the ethics commission sole authority to investigate such matters would mean essentially that only the legislature can keep an eye on legislators. That’s because the commission is required to turn over any findings it has about lawmakers to a legislative committee, which then determines whether any public action should be taken.
Boy, is Les Merritt right. The State Ethics Commission is an appointed body; the State Auditor is elected. Both of them should have a role in corruption probes because neither of them can be trusted completely.
The fact that the Democrats, who are in charge of the governor’s mansion and state legislature, want to limit Merritt’s authority ought to be very frightening to all North Carolinians. Any ethics panel would have to answer to the party in charge, and for the foreseeable future that appears to be the party of Jim Black, Thomas Wright, Nick Mackey, et al. Les Merritt, meanwhile, is answerable to the voters every four years.