Unfortunately, rather than adopt the state Code of Ethics,
staff proposed an extremely weak
policy that would do little or nothing to prevent conflicted interests from
driving health reform and SIM’s $45 million in grants. Problems
have already arisen about the application for a grant from a SIM steering
committee member’s employer. This issue was first
raised with SIM’s Consumer Advisory Board in November, with no action
taken, and in a February
sign on letter from advocates to the Lieutenant Governor, with no response.
At their meeting, the SIM steering committee heard from four
public commenters on the importance of integrity, building trust, offering
alternatives to engage key stakeholders without compromising ethics, and urging
adoption of the state Code of Ethics. Commenters noted that municipal boards,
not covered by state law, have nevertheless adopted the state Code of Ethics to
build public trust.
Unfortunately the Committee was misinformed about several
areas of policy. It was reported that the Code
of Ethics includes revolving door and employment barriers to members.
However those provisions only apply to state employees. For example, former
state employees are prohibited from disclosing confidential information they
gained during their state employment for financial gain. The Code imposes no
barriers to employment on non-state employees. Thankfully a SIM committee member
dispelled the misinformation that if SIM adopts the Code, members would necessarily
have to file financial disclosure forms. Only 3.9% of CT’s 65,000 public
officials are required to file financial disclosure forms. Members also seemed
to believe that the financial forms are extensive. Disclosure includes only
naming sources of income, large assets and investments, not amounts; members do
not have to release their tax forms. Contrary to assertions from the Lieutenant
Governor’s staff, SIM committees are not purely advisory – as confirmed by the Ethics
Board Ruling.
Unfortunately, the committee decided to adopt the weak
policy but plans to study the Code further. To ensure the committee has
accurate information, they should ask for a presentation by the Office of State
Ethics. Some members did emphasize the importance of following up on the issue in
a timely way to ensure the public’s trust.
