Legislative Ethics

After hearing the news of the resignation, Common Cause Rhode Island executive director John M. Marion said, “It is a relief that Mr. Da Cruz will not be serving on the Ethics Commission. We are glad Governor McKee has acknowledged that the vetting process was flawed. We urge him to do due diligence when making future appointments.” Ethics Commission members should be carefully vetted because the panel has “extraordinary powers” provided for in the state constitution and because those appointments do not require the advice and consent of the state Senate, Marion said. “It has been a problem for some time that appointments to the Ethics Commission under multiple governors have been slow,” Marion said. “Sometimes that results in vacancies, which is not good for the commission. All the parties involved in these appointments, including the legislative leaders, should do their best to provide appointments that are both timely and well vetted.”

But John M. Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island, said Da Cruz’s conduct as a member of the South Kingstown Town Council “makes him unfit to serve on such an important body as the Rhode Island Ethics Commission.” Ethics Commission appointments are arguably the most important that a governor makes, aside from choosing state judges, Marion said. Rhode Island’s constitution gives the Ethics Commission “extraordinary powers,” including removing elected officials from office, and Common Cause fought for a law that holds Ethics Commission members to a higher standard, including banning lobbyists from the panel, he said. “Potential appointees should be fully vetted so that people who are asked to serve meet the highest standards,” Marion said. “In this case, it appears that vetting, if it did occur, failed, or the governor overlooked some rather egregious behavior by his most recent appointee.” Marion said the town manager appeared to find the sexual harassment allegations against Da Cruz “serious enough to tell the victims that, but for the fact that the town’s sexual harassment policy did not cover elected officials, Mr. Da Cruz would have been disciplined.” On the Ethics Commission, Da Cruz will have jurisdiction over those same employees, should they still work for the town, Marion said, noting that Town Council has since changed its sexual harassment policy to include its own members. “Mr. Da Cruz was allowed to get away with this behavior only because the town’s policy did not include his position at the time,” Marion said, “and he should not be trusted with the critical work of the Ethics Commission.”

The recent scandals show Indiana’s lobbying and campaign finance regulatory processes are a “complete failure,” said Julia Vaughn, leader of government watchdog Common Cause Indiana. “No state agency even recognized what was going on. … Thank goodness that the (Federal Bureau of Investigation) was paying attention,” Vaughn said — although she said Indiana Election Division and Indiana Lobby Registration Commission (ILRC) staff were “doing the best they can under the very bad structure” in place. “We need some sort of (review) process. I hate to be the person who says, ‘I hope this scandal blows up into the biggest thing ever,’ but that’s what spurs reform,” Vaughn said.

“There is a disconnect between what voters want and what the legislature wants,” said Catherine Turcer, executive director of Common Cause Ohio. “It just highlights how gerrymandered the state legislature is.”

“The danger (with rhetoric surrounding impeaching Protasiewicz) is that you undermine significant confidence in the court,” said Jay Heck, executive director of the good government group Common Cause Wisconsin. “But one of the problems we have now is that’s not just a function of this past election, that is a function of things that have been occurring going back to 1997. “This is long-term. This is 25 years in the making.”

“We know it does create another impediment for people trying to get to the polls,” said Ann Webb, policy director at Common Cause North Carolina, a group that has sued to stop gerrymandering and new restrictions on voting. Webb said the voter ID requirement is part an effort by Republican lawmakers to narrow access to voting. “We like to say, ‘In 2023 there will be voter ID. In 2024, there will be more,’” Webb said.