[EL] State corruption risk rankings

Fri Jan 25 07:48:35 PST 2013

It's no secret. The State Integrity report is based on input criteria, not outputs. If you have laws X, Y, and Z in place, you score well, if not you don't. Results don't matter in their calculation.

This report is almost a year old, actually. I commented briefly on it at the time it was released. http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2012/03/20/measuring-inputs-not-outputs/

It is indicative of a "reform" mindset that places ideology over pragmatism. I point this out only because there are those who insist that "reform" is pragmatic and the opposition to more regulation is "ideological." Those familiar with my work, at least, beginning with my "breakthrough" article, "Faulty Assumptions and Undemocratic Consequences of Campaign Finance Reform," will recognize that an emphasis on pragmatic results is the guiding point of my analysis of the issue, and in my view the ultimate reason for a robust interpretation of the First Amendment in this area. I have often written that a strong First Amendment *is* a key part of any system for addressing government corruption and political equality and responsiveness. One may not agree (surprise - I've met more than a few people who don't). But I am an advocate of a strong First Amendment, protecting as much speech as possible, because I believe that works best for good government - not merely for more "ideological" reasons, such as personal autonomy arguments.

I just mention this because I think recognizing that both sides have both ideological and pragmatic, results-oriented arguments is very important, and I think it is often overlooked that the "reform" side can be every bit as ideological, and often more so, as those favoring deregulation and free speech. Here is a very short essay on that theme I did for the Election Law Journal in their McConnell v. FEC symposium issue: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089%2F153312904322907928

Bradley A. Smith

Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault

   Professor of Law

Capital University Law School

303 E. Broad St.

Columbus, OH 43215

614.236.6317

http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx

________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Benjamin Barr [benjamin.barr at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 10:18 AM
To: Sean Parnell
Cc: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] State corruption risk rankings

Interestingly enough, Wyoming, which ranks in the red flag, severe risk of corruption zone in the recent "state integrity" report scored as the "best run state" at least two years in a row over at Wall Street 24/7.  See http://247wallst.com/2011/11/28/best-and-worst-run-states-in-america-an-analysis-of-all-50/2/.  California, proudly lauded as clean by the "state integrity" folks, scored as worst run by 24/7.  See http://247wallst.com/2011/11/28/best-and-worst-run-states-in-america-an-analysis-of-all-50/6/.

Perhaps there is some correlation going on here?

Forward,

First Amendment Ben

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Sean Parnell <sean at impactpolicymanagement.com<mailto:sean at impactpolicymanagement.com>> wrote:
I thought the list might enjoy the recent report (I assume – there’s no date attached that I can easily find, but it is the leading feature on the home page) from something called State Integrity Investigation, which appears to be a joint project of the Center for Public Integrity, Global Integrity, and Public Radio International. It purports to rate the risk of corruption in all 50 states based on a variety of factors – campaign finance of course, lobbying disclosure, procurement, public access to information, etc.

Residents of the Garden State should rest easy knowing that their state is least susceptible to corruption according to these rankings. Other states scoring in the top quartile include Rhode Island, Illinois, and Hawaii. Louisiana just missed being in the top quarter, coming in at #15. Citizens who need to watch closely because their states are at high risk include well-known cesspools of corruption such as Utah, both South and North Dakota, and Maine.

Here’s the link: http://www.stateintegrity.org/your_state

There’s a term, I can’t recall it exactly: ‘Something in, same something out.’

Best,

Sean Parnell
President
Impact Policy Management, LLC
6411 Caleb Court
Alexandria, VA  22315
571-289-1374<tel:571-289-1374> (c)
sean at impactpolicymanagement.com<mailto:sean at impactpolicymanagement.com>

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130125/4718388c/attachment.html>