Ethics bill altered, passed in House

• By WILL SENTELL
• Advocate Capitol News Bureau
• Published: May 13, 2008 - Page: 5A - UPDATED: 12:05 a.m.

• Print
• Email
• Save
• Share

• Del.icio.us
• Digg
• Facebook
• Reddit
• 

Legislation that backers said would impose a more reasonable standard for judging ethics violations won House approval Monday 45-42.

The proposal was offered in the form of an amendment to House Bill 906, which would make changes in state ethics rules.

The bill then won House approval 72-22 and next faces action in the Senate.

However, the proposal is sure to trigger Senate controversy because of the addition of the amendment, sponsored by Rep. Cedric Richmond, D-New Orleans.

The issue stems from one of the ethics bills approved during a special session in February called by Gov. Bobby Jindal.

Current law requires “reliable and substantial” evidence of wrongdoing in an ethics case.

But a bill that takes effect Aug. 15 requires a higher “clear and convincing” standard in ethics cases.

The amendment approved Monday would remove “clear and convincing” and make the standard “any substantial evidence” in ethics disputes.

The Public Affairs Research Council and other critics contend that “clear and convincing” proof would be excessive and would slow the prosecution of ethics cases.

Richmond said his new language would show the state that lawmakers “were not trying to play fast and loose with the rules” by passing tougher ethics laws that have to meet near impossible standards of proof.

“It is my opinion as a lawyer that when you are talking about clear and convincing you are almost (requiring) beyond a reasonable doubt,” Richmond told the House.

Richmond said his proposal offers a middle ground between requiring a “preponderance of evidence” but less than “clear and convincing.

“I think this body could send a message to the Senate that we are willing to deal with this subject,” he said of the House.