Support for Removing the Political Party Veto Which Hinders JCOPE’s Ability to Enforce New York’s Ethics Laws
SUMMARY
The Government Ethics Committee issued a report in support of legislation which would amend the Executive Law in relation to the Joint Commission on Public Ethics. Specifically, the bill would remove the requirement that legislators, state employees and statewide officials cannot be found guilty of ethical violations by JCOPE without the votes of at least two members of his/her own political party. The bill removes the political party veto and brings JCOPE’s voting rules into line with other agencies that act by a simple majority vote, including the Commission on Judicial Conduct, the state Public Campaign Finance Board, the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board and the New York City Campaign Finance Board. While the committee supports this short-term solution to JCOPE gridlock, it reiterates its strong preference for a constitutional amendment establishing a truly independent statewide integrity commission.
WATCH NOW: “Ten Years In, JCOPE and Its Future” – a February 2021 City Bar program asking “can structural reforms reinvigorate JCOPE for the next decade or must JCOPE go the way of its predecessors and be disbanded?”
ADVOCACY
Letter to Legislative Leaders Requesting an Oversight Hearing on JCOPE – May 4, 2021
REPORT
REPORT ON LEGISLATION BY THE GOVERNMENT ETHICS AND STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
A.6611 (M. of A. Hyndman)
S.5254-A (Sen. Biaggi)
AN ACT to amend the executive law, in relation to the joint commission on public ethics
THIS BILL IS APPROVED
The Government Ethics and State Affairs Committee of the New York City Bar Association supports the enactment of A.6611/S.5254-A, which would remove the requirement that legislators, state employees, and state-wide officials cannot be found guilty of ethical violations by the Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE) without the votes of at least two members of his/her own political party.
Since JCOPE was created in 2011, the City Bar has issued a series of reports regarding the commission’s structure and the manner in which it hinders effective administration of the state’s ethics laws.[1] As detailed in these reports, a central flaw to JCOPE’s structure is the special voting rule that allows an enforcement action supported by a super-majority of commission members to be blocked by a minority of commission members of the same political party as the potential subject of the enforcement action. Indeed, it is well acknowledged that political party protection measures impede effective enforcement. In 2013, for example, the Moreland Commission to Investigate Public Corruption singled out the political party protection mechanism found in the membership structure of the New York State Board of Elections as a cause of the poor enforcement record of that body.[2]
A.6611/S.5254-A removes the political party veto and brings JCOPE’s voting rules into line with other agencies that act by a simple majority vote, including the Commission on Judicial Conduct,[3] the state Public Campaign Finance Board,[4] the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board,[5] and the New York City Campaign Finance Board.
For all of these reasons, and for the reasons illustrated in our aforementioned reports, the City Bar supports the enactment of A.6611/S.5254-A.
This City Bar notes, however, that an additional special voting provision has resulted in gridlock at JCOPE. This provision requires that its executive director be approved by at least one Republican and Democratic appointee of both the Governor and the Legislature.[6] As the executive director position has been vacant since June 2019, the Committee encourages the Legislature to consider amending this provision as well.
While the City Bar believes that the promise of an independent monitor with the necessary safeguards to protect against political interference can only be realized by abolishing JCOPE and replacing it with an entity to be established by constitutional amendment,[7] changes to JCOPE’s voting rules provide a needed short-term solution until a constitutional amendment can be adopted.
Government Ethics & State Affairs Committee
Edward L. Murray, Chair
April 2021
[1] “Hope for JCOPE,” Report of the New York City Bar Association and Common Cause/New, March 14, 2014, https://www2.nycbar.org/pdf/report/uploads/Hope-for-JCOPE-Report.pdf; “Ten Years In, Is There Still Hope for JCOPE?”, Report of the Government Ethics and State Affairs Committee of the New York City Bar Association, Feb. 16, 2021, https://www.nycbar.org/reports/ten-years-in-is-there-still-hope-for-jcope/.
[2] Hope for JCOPE, at 26.
[3] Judiciary Law § 41(6).
[4] Election Law § 14-207(1).
[5] N.Y.C. Charter § 2602(h).
[6] Exec. Law § 94(9)(a).
[7] Report on A.1929/S.855 by the New York City Bar Association Committee on Government Ethics and State Affairs, Reissued March 8, 2021, https://www.nycbar.org/reports/support-for-the-creation-of-a-nys-government-integrity-commission/.
Footnotes
[1] “Hope for JCOPE,” Report of the New York City Bar Association and Common Cause/New, March 14, 2014, https://www2.nycbar.org/pdf/report/uploads/Hope-for-JCOPE-Report.pdf; “Ten Years In, Is There Still Hope for JCOPE?”, Report of the Government Ethics and State Affairs Committee of the New York City Bar Association, Feb. 16, 2021, https://www.nycbar.org/reports/ten-years-in-is-there-still-hope-for-jcope/.
[2] Hope for JCOPE, at 26.
[3] Judiciary Law § 41(6).
[4] Election Law § 14-207(1).
[5] N.Y.C. Charter § 2602(h).
[6] Exec. Law § 94(9)(a).
[7] Report on A.1929/S.855 by the New York City Bar Association Committee on Government Ethics and State Affairs, Reissued March 8, 2021, https://www.nycbar.org/reports/support-for-the-creation-of-a-nys-government-integrity-commission/.
