Photo by Mr. T in DC.

The 58-page comprehensive ethics bill Councilmember Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4) previewed late last week would certainly put some muscle into enforcing ethics in the District, but the measures she proposed don’t go far enough for some.

Critics have pointed to a number of problems with the legislation, from cost to scope.

According to some, the mere cost of the legislation’s centerpiece — the creation of a new three-person Board of Ethics and Government Accountability — will be problematic, given the state of the city’s finances. Estimates put its cost at between $600,000 and $800,000 a year; the Examiner cited political consultant Chuck Thies as saying that it wouldn’t be enough to serve its broad purpose.

Dorothy Brizill, a good government watchdog who testified at a hearing on ethics in late October, is more pessimistic about the board itself. Brizill wrote this morning that “It’s an effective solution to the problem only if you believe that the problem is how to punt the ball until the public forgets about the current rash of scandals.”

“Otherwise, it’s a near-total disappointment,” she opined.

Other critics claim that Bowser missed an opportunity by failing to include provisions that address the means by which corruption and influence peddling happen, such as through the bundling of campaign contributions. Councilmember Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), who himself proposed a stand-alone bill banning bundling, told The Washington Times that he might seek to amend Bowser’s bill to include the provision.

That the bill lands squarely in the middle of campaign season may be uncomfortable for Bowser, and one of her challengers wants her to step aside due to connections to a well-placed lobbyist. Earlier this month, Renee Bowser (no relation), who is vying for the Ward 4 seat on the D.C. Council, accused the incumbent of having links to David Wilmot, a prominent lawyer and lobbyist. (A review of Bowser’s campaign finance reports found over $24,000 in bundled donations; in July, Ward 2 Councilmember Jack Evans was found to have received $6,000 in donations from 12 different companies listed at the same Maryland address.)

Even without any changes, Bowser’s proposal would still have an impact. Reporting requirements for councilmembers and lobbyists would increase, transition and inaugural committees would be more closely monitored, lobbyists could not offer discounted legal services to legislators, donations to Constituent Services Funds would be curtailed and councilmembers would be held to higher ethical standards. If any were found to have violated the District’s Code of Conduct for employees, they could be subject to censure or an early recall from office.