Idaho gets an F on financial disclosure for state officials

[urbuddha]

Idaho gets F on financial disclosure for top state officials


By Betsy Z. Russell - The Spokesman-Review
Edition Date: 07/22/07


Idaho is one of just three states that require no personal financial disclosure from its state Supreme Court justices, and one of four that require none from its governor, according to a new survey of states.
That makes Idaho the only state in the nation with no such requirements for top officials of any of its three branches of government. An earlier study by the same organization, the Center for Public Integrity, found that Idaho was one of just four states with no financial disclosure requirements for state legislators.

By contrast, Washington topped the new survey with the strictest financial disclosure requirements for its governor among all the states.

"Washington was the only state to receive an A grade in the center's analysis because it provided the most information to the public on its governor's personal income and investments," the center wrote in its report.

Idaho's grade was an F. But Sen. Denton Darrington, R-Declo, chairman of the Idaho Senate Judiciary Committee, said the survey results didn't bother him. "If somebody had a conflict of interest, a Supreme Court justice on a case, and they don't recuse themselves, there'd be a lot of hell to pay, I think," Darrington said. "I don't know how far we want to get into personal stuff. I don't know if the public is protected by it in a small state like Idaho."

When the Center for Public Integrity compared state disclosure laws for legislators two years ago, Idaho had just come through an ethics scandal in its state Senate involving a senator who introduced a bill to enable his own convenience store to qualify for a state liquor license even though it was across from an elementary school. He didn't disclose his interest and instead denied it. That senator, Jack Noble, resigned before an ethics vote could be held on whether to eject him from office.

At the time, many lawmakers were talking about moving toward requiring financial disclosure for Idaho legislators, but nothing has passed.

Darrington said he's not convinced that Idaho needs financial disclosure for its justices, governor or lawmakers. "What's the difference between Supreme Court and governor and legislators?" Darrington asked. "If the assumption is that because of their holdings there's a conflict on their actions, there wouldn't be any difference, because legislators act — just as I as a schoolteacher voted on school appropriations bills," he said.

[Major Hogwash]

1. I just read that the other day, was news to me.

I couldn't believe that they didn't have a sunshine clause on this, requiring these people to release their financial data.

Tells you how scared the Republicans are of regular people finding out that they are wealthy.