We discuss this in class from time to time. The Texas Tribune suggests that the lack of transparency in the Texas Legislature makes it difficult for us to determien which legislators are looking out for thebest interest of the state and their constituents, and which are serving themselves.
On the presidential campaign trail, Gov. Rick Perry waxed eloquent about the merits of Texas’ part-time Legislature, saying that Congress would be more effective if its members had “real jobs back at home.”
“We’re the 13th-largest economy in the world in Texas,” Perry said, “and we come to Austin for 140 days every other year, and it works wonderfully.”
Wonderfully, it turns out, for many of those elected. Paid a pittance by taxpayers for their official state duties, lawmakers need to make a living elsewhere, and the prestige and influence of their elective office often helps them do it.
But with a conflict disclosure system rife with holes, virtually toothless ethics laws often left to the interpretation of the lawmakers they are supposed to regulate, and a Legislature historically unwilling to make itself more transparent, the reality is Texans know exceedingly little about who or what influences the people elected to represent them. They have no way to differentiate between lawmakers motivated entirely by the interests of their constituents and those in it for their own enrichment.
"Ostensibly, there is a defined level of disclosure and an agreed code of conduct,” said Jack Gullahorn, a Texas ethics expert who represents the state’s trade association for lobbyists. “But in general, either the sanctions aren’t there or the provisions aren’t clear enough to give people that don’t want to play by the rules any incentive to avoid the consequences for their actions.”
They are staring a series that look into conflicts of interest, We'll follow it along.
