Hoosiers have an inherent sense of right and wrong, even if they are legislators at the Statehouse.
Some of that wouldn’t be apparent if you only knew of the case involving state Rep. Eric Turner, R-Cicero, whose House District 32 covers a portion of northwest Madison County. Turner attempted to kill a proposed General Assembly moratorium on nursing home construction that would have hurt his family business. A House ethics panel cleared him of wrongdoing but House Speaker Brian Bosma pledged reform and bumped Turner from his leadership role as speaker pro tempore.
Turner’s name is still on the Nov. 4 ballot. He has said he will resign if re-elected, allowing Republicans to pick a replacement.
On Monday, the House Committee on Ethics met for the second time to discuss reform. Three people showed up to testify, and one of those had been asked to prepare a report on what other states do when it comes to ethics. The committee said it would consider the report. Sadly, no one from the Senate side sat in the meeting; that’s because this whole Turner case is perceived as a House problem. And that may be why only three people showed up; trouble with ethics isn’t seen as a rampant Indiana predicament.
The Turner case aside, the Indiana House currently has a workable process in addressing ethics problems, based on the report given by Peggy Kerns of the National Conference of State Legislatures.
All 50 states have statutes regulating ethics. Indiana is among 47 states that require legislators to file a financial disclosure, though many Hoosiers would agree that finding a statement of economic interest can be a tough online search. And Indiana does not require the statement to offer addresses of businesses or information on real property.
When it comes to conflicts of interest, the Senate Code of Ethics stresses that high moral and ethical standards among senators are essential to free government. The House Code of Ethics gives direction about what to do when a conflict arises.
Many of the guidelines are in place. But many Hoosiers are quite aware that the Senate and House operate under different rules. Seven states have such rules written into their constitutions. No one is suggesting that Indiana amend its constitution but there is obvious concern that the legislative chambers are operating under different rules.
House members can request recusal from voting; their decision is not debatable. The Senate’s guidelines permit elected officials to seek an advisory opinion from the Legislative Ethics Committee.
Only three of the House rules relate to the Turner case. House Rule 47 says any member who is “immediately and particularly interested” in the result of a vote shall ask to be excused. More clarity is needed.
Even though rules are in place, there should be no doubt that the House needs reform. In a wider sense, there needs to be a joint committee assuring that House and Senate members operate under the same codes. Both should stress fullest expectations of transparency. As any Hoosier would expect.