| Public disclosure was viewed as the central tool of government accountability in the post-Watergate reform era. By 1978, Congress and thirty-seven state legislatures had enacted legislation requiring the public disclosure of the personal financial interests of public officials. The Massachusetts Legislature resisted demands for ethics reforms until the conviction of two powerful state senators on federal extortion charges. In June 1978, the Legislature enacted the Massachusetts Financial Disclosure Law, one of the toughest ethics laws in the country.; The primary purpose of the Massachusetts Financial Disclosure Law was twofold: first, to institute a statutory public financial disclosure requirement for designated state and county officials and employees; and, second, to create an independent state ethics commission to administer the new disclosure requirement.; The fifteen-year experience in Massachusetts with public financial disclosure demonstrates that it has been of mixed accomplishment. Public financial disclosure did not result in mass resignations, as opponents predicted, but may act as an impediment to public service. Public financial disclosure did not improve public confidence in government, as proponents promised, but may act to deter conflicts of interest. Finally, public financial disclosure can be an important tool in detecting conflicts of interest, but it has been little used by the State Ethics Commission.; The most serious defect of the Financial Disclosure Law is the lack of accountability for the state's chief ethical watchdog agency. In building on untested rules, rulings, and enforcement actions, the State Ethics Commission has gradually constructed an ethics empire that little resembles the drafters original design. It is thus time for a candid and comprehensive review of the Massachusetts ethics laws and of the practices of the State Ethics Commission. |
