Four powerful Georgia lawmakers reported getting the maximum $2,300 campaign contribution from one of Georgia’s largest title-pawn lenders just before the 2008 legislative session. But the donor, Select Management Resources LLC, never disclosed giving the money to them.
Select Management did disclose a $2,300 donation that year to then-state Rep. Stan Watson — but the lawmaker never reported getting it. For that matter, Watson never disclosed how or if he spent another $45,000 left in his campaign fund after he lost a 2008 bid for DeKalb CEO. (Watson said Friday he would call me back to talk about it but did not return subsequent voice mail and e-mail messages.)
So, are these simply accounting oversights, or something more interesting?
The State Ethics Commission might be able to get some answers if it had the proper investigative resources. But Georgia lawmakers’ 2010 ethics “reform” bill has saddled the cash-strapped agency with new duties — and no more money.
“We have the same budget but we’re given twice the work,” said Stacey Kalberman, the commission’s executive secretary.
The ethics law, which takes effect in January, requires that thousands of candidates for local offices across Georgia file campaign disclosures with the Ethics Commission rather than city or county election overseers.
Kalberman believes in the goal of consolidating candidate disclosures with her agency: “That was the right thing to do.” But she acknowledges it will make the agency’s task more difficult.
“The additional responsibility without any additional funds is tough,” she said.
State law already requires that the commission examine each campaign finance report as it comes in to make sure it is complete and accurate.
“From a practical standpoint, that’s impossible to do with the staff I have,” she said.
What about the more thorough audits that have led to fines for financial disclosure violations in the pasts?
“We really have no means to go back and make sure people are filing when they are supposed to,” Kalberman said. “We can’t really do the more in-depth audits that need to be done in order to make sure people have reported everything they need to report.”
“If [lawmakers] really want us to do the job,” Kalberman said, the agency needs two more auditors and one or two more attorneys. It has just one of each now.
Instead, she’s had to hire a computer programmer to handle all the additional disclosures that will be coming in next year. Kalberman, who is supposed to be running the agency, is helping with legal work.
Some critics believe the Legislature uses its budget oversight to rein in the commission so it won’t get too aggressive.
“It appears to me that, both from a budgeting point of view and other pressure that’s been exerted, the General Assembly has clearly not acted to give the Ethics Commission all the tools it needed to do a complete job,” said Bill Bozarth, director of Common Cause Georgia.
Rep. Joe Wilkinson, the House ethics chairman, said he wants to try to double the commission’s budget next year, perhaps by jacking up filing fees for political candidates. But that would pose problems, he said, in smaller jurisdictions where elected officials are paid little or nothing for their service.
To be fair, tougher fines in the new ethics law will encourage candidates to file disclosure reports that are complete and on time.
But many of the penalties could only be assessed if the commission has the time to investigate and make a case. Violators would have little reason to fear a hefty fine unless someone — other than me, that is — were to catch them.
Jim Walls, retired investigations editor of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, runs the watchdog news Web site atlantaunfiltered.com.
About the Author
