Legislature Passes Ethics Measure Tied to Pay Boost

Seeking to remove a cloud of scandal hanging over the Capitol, the Legislature approved a broad ethics measure Friday aimed at curbing special-interest influence while paving the way for a substantial legislative pay raise.

The proposed constitutional amendment easily won approval in both houses despite protests from some Assembly members that it would enable legislators to get a salary increase without ever having to vote for it.

The bipartisan proposal, which will be placed before voters in June, would ban honorariums for elected state officials, require legislators to hold their meetings in public and prohibit lawmakers who leave office from lobbying the Legislature for a year.

At the same time, it would create an independent commission appointed by the governor that would have the sole power to set salaries for legislators.

Members of the Legislature now receive $40,816 a year plus a tax-free expense allowance, and some hope the commission would give them a pay hike that would more than offset the loss of their honorariums.

“There is an unmistakable mood throughout our state that correctly calls for changes in the way public officials conduct public business,” Senate President Pro Tem David A. Roberti, author of the measure, told his colleagues. “We are trying our very best, in a very definitive, positive way, to respond to the public’s call.”

However, as the Legislature rushed to take action before its adjournment, the measure ran into harsh criticism in the Assembly from lawmakers who objected to linking the issue of ethics with a likely salary increase.

“It’s ironic that a good ethics proposal should end up being a massive pay increase,” said Assemblyman Phillip Wyman (R-Tehachapi) in urging his colleagues to vote against the constitutional amendment.

Added Assemblywoman Jackie Speier (D-South San Francisco): “I think it’s a mistake to link a salary increase with cleaning up our act. We should clean up our act first and then ask for a pay increase.”

The Legislature has been under mounting pressure to enact stricter standards of conduct ever since the FBI raided the Capitol more than a year ago in an ongoing investigation of political corruption.

Payments Probed

The federal probe was launched in 1985 to uncover legislators who might have accepted payments--such as honorariums--from special-interest groups in exchange for favorable action on legislation.

So far, the investigation has resulted in the indictment of Sen. Joseph B. Montoya (D-Whittier) on charges of extortion, racketeering and money-laundering. At least five other elected officials continue to be subjects of the probe.

In private negotiations during the last several weeks, Roberti, Assembly Speaker Willie Brown and Republican legislative leaders rejected proposals from some lawmakers simply to adopt new ethics rules outright, such as a ban on honorariums.

Instead, they agreed to push for adoption of the proposed constitutional amendment that would impose tougher standards of behavior only if the voters approve the salary commission plan.

Some supporters of the measure argued that legislators ought to receive higher pay from taxpayers so they will not be so tempted to take money from groups that have a stake in the fate of legislation.

“They should get more public money through the front door and less special-interest money through the back door,” said Walter Zelman, a lobbyist for California Common Cause, a citizens’ group that supports the ethics plan.

Private Objections

Privately, some members of the Legislature objected to the measure because it would limit their ability to earn outside income, such as the lucrative speaking fees many of them collect. Speaker Brown, for instance, reported receiving $89,600 in speaking fees last year.

But during a heated debate on the floor of the Assembly, most opposition focused on the question of the salary commission.

Opponents argued that the Legislature is in danger of creating the same controversy that beset Congress earlier this year when an appointed commission recommended a congressional pay hike of 50%, from $89,000 to $135,000. The increase was linked to legislation that would have prohibited members of Congress from accepting honorariums.

Initially, members of Congress planned to accept the pay raise without a vote, but a public outcry ultimately forced the federal lawmakers to reject the increase.

Despite the congressional experience, the California constitutional amendment won the approval of the Senate by a vote of 33 to 7. Hours later, it passed the Assembly by a vote of 68 to 7. The proposed amendment goes directly to the June ballot.

Among its provisions, the amendment would require all legislative committees to meet in public, except to discuss personnel, security and litigation matters.

It also would prohibit legislators and top state officials from lobbying their former agencies for a year after leaving office. Current members of the Legislature, however, would be exempted.

In addition, the measure would require the Legislature to adopt laws limiting the gifts that members can receive from individuals or groups with an interest in legislation.

But the constitutional amendment would do little to strengthen the enforcement of conflict-of-interest violations in the Legislature. While lawmakers are prohibited from voting on bills in which they have a financial interest, there is no penalty for such action.

Campaign Fund Curb

In a related action, the Assembly passed another measure by Roberti that would limit the personal use of campaign funds by elected officials and candidates.

Many elected officials have taken advantage of lax existing laws and used campaign funds to pay for such things as trips and living expenses. Roberti’s bill would require that expenditures of campaign funds be “directly” related to campaign purposes. On a 70-0 vote, the Assembly sent the measure to Gov. George Deukmejian.

Backers of the ethics proposals said they would go a long way toward imposing new standards of behavior and improving the image of the Legislature.

“This plan will help remove the cloud that some believe surrounds the Capitol concerning unethical conduct,” said Sen. John Doolittle (R-Rocklin) during debate on the constitutional amendment. “It’s an unequivocal declaration that we do not tolerate in the Legislature that kind of conduct. We make that statement to the world.”