Editorial: Bring back ‘public’ service

Monday, Nov. 5, 2007 | 7:17 a.m.

It is a conflict of interest for government regulators to accept free travel - or free anything - from the industries they regulate.

But too many government regulators cannot accept this simple premise. They frequently travel the world at the expense of those they regulate.

The common excuses from regulators for this breach of ethics are that they need to communicate with industry leaders, and that their privately paid travel saves taxpayer money.

The latest example comes from the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which has been in the news a lot lately because of all the recalls of Chinese-made toys.

Internal commission records document nearly 30 trips since 2002 taken by acting Chairwoman Nancy Nord or former Chairman Hal Stratton that were paid for in full or in part by industries regulated by the commission, The Washington Post reported Friday.

The newspaper reported that the costs of the trips, including airfare, meals and lodging, totaled nearly $60,000 and that the destinations included China, Spain, New Orleans and a golf resort on Hilton Head Island, S.C.

The paper also reported that Nord and Stratton took several trips that were paid for by lawyers who represent manufacturers in product liability lawsuits. Those trips were in obvious conflict with the commission's mission of promoting and enforcing product safety.

Such travel is not uncommon. USA Today reported in August that dozens of federal regulators and officials accepted expenses-paid trips around the world from lobbying groups and companies with business before the government.

How can the public trust that regulations governing industries are being properly enforced when federal regulators are cozying up to the industries, enjoying their bountiful comps? The answer is it can't.

Under its new Democratic leadership, Congress cracked down this year on such travel freebies for its members and staffs. It is time now for federal agencies to also ban such excesses. Business travel by public servants should be on behalf of the public - and at the public's expense.