[ OUR OPINION ]
Accepting freebies can
be costly for officialsSTATE officials have cleansed themselves in the past year from the impropriety of accepting expensive gifts derived from their positions of power. Since being put under public glare late last year, legislators have accepted modest freebies that don't rise to the level of scandal. Public disclosure assures that voters will be able to judge whether those sweeteners are acceptable, and legislators have begun to recognize that reality.
THE ISSUE
Gifts reported to have been accepted by state legislators in the past year are less valuable than those received the previous year.
Last October, the Star-Bulletin's Rob Perez reported that several legislators had accepted expensive gifts that may have been in violation of state law. They ranged from a dozen Pro Bowl tickets worth $900 to complimentary membership at exclusive country clubs. Recent filings with the state Ethics Commission show acceptance of no such extravagant largess.
The state ethics rules prohibit state officials, including legislators, from accepting any gift worth more than $200 under circumstances where "it can be reasonably inferred" that it was intended to influence the official. Numerous legislators reported accepting privileges at Waialae Country Club, where membership costs $55,000, or Honolulu Country Club, without having to pay its initiation fee was $20,000 and monthly dues of $340.
Sen. Cal Kawamoto offered the laughable explanation that the gifts were made "because they like you, not because of what your position is." Kawamoto had accepted $375 in gift certificates from lobbyist James J. Stone, who represented concessionaires nervous about a pending bill. This year, Kawamoto and eight other legislators accepted a free invitation to play in the Hawaii Hotel & Lodging Association's annual golf tournament, which cost $170 for hoi polloi.
That is below the cost threshold for state officials to refuse, and Sen. Norman Sakamoto, one of the recipients, said such a venue is "a relationship-building opportunity. It's broader that just lobbying." Another participant, Sen. Willie Espero, told Perez, "This is just like any lobbyist taking a legislator out to lunch or dinner." Either way, many of their constituents are likely to agree that such one-time favors are commonplace and acceptable.
James Benton, an analyst for the watchdog organization Common Cause, disagrees. The hotel industry golf tournament, he said, "is definitely going to create an appearance that the hotel industry is going to get some favor in return." Lawmakers who want to come across to their constituents as squeaky clean are likely to think twice before accepting a such a tee time.
Overall, the kinds and values of gifts reported by state officials were a dramatic, downward improvement since Perez's report of last October. "It's almost like night and day," said Dan Mollway, executive director of the state Ethics Commission, "The change has been very significant."
Legislators and other state officials who are offered substantial perquisites from individuals or companies with an interest in legislation should realize that their acceptance not only will be recorded in Mollway's files but is likely to be published in the newspaper. They seem to understand that consequence.
