BETWEEN THE LINES Ethics And Need For Them

In the same week, Arkansas lawmakers passed bills to improve ethics legislation and another to illustrate why stronger ethics laws are needed.

First, consider the new ethics legislation. It isn’t what it could have been, although it is a step forward.

The reforms boil down essentially to two provisions. One will require former lawmakers to wait a year after leaving office before they can become lobbyists.

The other will limit what a sitting lawmaker may submit for travel reimbursement to the least costly method available, flying or driving.

Identical bills came out of both the Senate and House, each sponsored by the respective leaders of those chambers. Senate Bill 194 by Sen. President Pro Tem Paul Bookout, D-Jonesboro, and House Bill 1284 by House Speaker Robert Moore, D-Arkansas City, each passed in the opposite chamber and are headed to Gov. Mike Beebe’s desk for his signature.

Gov. Beebe has said he will sign the legislation, although the governor himself suggested earlier that it could have been stronger.

For the record, the votes for these bills were huge. Of the 135 lawmakers, all but 11 eventually signed on as co-sponsors. The Senate passed both the House and Senate bills 35-0 and the House gave its version a 96-to-2 vote.

To be sure, as much as the lawmakers apparently liked the legislation, not everyone does.

Among the disappointing elements is that the required “cooling off” period between legislating and lobbying is just one year and does not affect current lawmakers, only those elected in 2012 or later.

Also absent from this bipartisan effort at reform is any further attention to gifts a lawmaker may receive. Tough talk before the session actually included banning all gifts to legislators from lobbyists, including meals. The idea didn’t fly.

Now consider that second bit of legislation that flew through the chambers this week - a bill limiting liquor store franchises and therefore limiting competition for business.

You’ve got to wonder how many gifts and campaign donations were offered to make that happen, especially since it passed with such lightning speed.

House Bill 1282 by Rep. Robert Dale, R-Dover, went through the House, then the Senate in about two weeks’ time. Sen. Michael Lamoureax, R-Russellville, was the Senate sponsor.

Notably, unlike so many bills that get easy passage, no one else signed on as co-sponsors of the legislation. Lawmakers apparently didn’t want credit for this one the way they did the ethics bills.

Many nonetheless voted for HB 1282. In the House, the bill passed 76 to 16, with five members not voting and one voting present.

The Senate vote was 27 to 3, with five senators not voting.

Whatever else supporters may say about the bill, it is clearly aimed at stopping businesses like Macadoodles, the Missouri liquor store chain that fought for its Springdale location, from easily expanding elsewhere in Arkansas.

Some lawmakers may have been duped into thinking they were somehow controlling the availability of “demon rum.” But most had to know they were instead protecting the interests of existing liquor store owners.

Macadoodles’ permit, you’ll recall, was fought hard by the Springdale Liquor Association, one of three Arkansas companies with existing multiple-store permits.

Springdale Liquor Association has seven stores, a competitive advantage created when the Legislature grandfathered in the company’s right to permits for multiple stores 40 years ago.

Clearly, established liquor interests had an effective lobbying force in Little Rock then and still exert their influence now.

BRENDA BLAGG IS A COLUMNIST FOR NORTHWEST ARKANSAS MEDIA.