Editorial: Ethics reform has priority over rivalries

Monday, Dec. 13, 2004 | 8:50 a.m.

The impeachment trial of Controller Kathy Augustine earlier this month did not serve to boost anyone's confidence in the way ethics laws are enforced in Nevada. Although she stipulated in September to three willful ethics violations related to her use of state employees and equipment in running her 2002 re-election campaign, the Nevada Senate convicted her of just one of the violations. And it decided that a reprimand was sufficient punishment. Augustine could have been removed from office, and would have been under revised ethics laws being proposed by Assembly Speaker Richard Perkins.

The Henderson Democrat's proposals include suggestions that have been made in the past by other legislators. Perkins said the Augustine matter played a large role in his decision to put ethics in the spotlight after the Legislature convenes in February. One rule he advocates is automatic removal of any public official found guilty of three "willful" violations of state ethics laws. Under this rule, which we believe has merit, Augustine would never have undergone impeachment in the Assembly and a trial in the Senate. The law would have required her immediate ouster.

Perkins said the ongoing federal investigation of political corruption in Clark County, and the scandals in 2003 involving some double-dipping legislators, also point to the need for tougher ethics laws. This newspaper has pointed to that need for years. We hope the proposals by Perkins and other legislators are decided on their merits and aren't waylaid by political rivalry.

One of Perkins' proposals resurrects the notion that elected officials should resign their positions if they decide to run for another office. This would squarely affect Senate Minority Leader Dina Titus, D-Las Vegas, who has floated her name as a potential candidate for governor in 2006. Perkins, too, plans to be a candidate in that race. Titus would be in the middle of her Senate term in 2006, while Perkins' Assembly term would be finished. Already Titus is accusing Perkins of targeting her with that proposal. "This is just a thinly veiled effort for Richard to get at me and it's embarrassing," Titus told the Sun. Perkins denies her charge.

It's just this kind of back-and-forth among legislators that halts progress on many worthy bills. Perkins would do well to drop this particular proposal if it's going to cause a rift between his camp and Titus's camp large enough to skewer the whole drive for ethics reform. The public would be much better served if Titus, who has her own ideas for toughening ethics laws, and Perkins worked together on this critical issue. In our view, there is a desperate need for ethics reform in Nevada and the state's Democratic leaders represent the best chance of bringing it about. They could each show their worthiness to be governor by putting the good of the public ahead of political gamesmanship.