Makeup of Ethics Commission hangs in the balance

It’s been a tumultuous year for the North Dakota Ethics Commission and its relationship with both the legislative and judicial branches of government. Now, a squabble over who will serve on the commission hangs in the balance, while members with expired terms continue to serve as lame ducks.

Gov. Kelly Armstrong, Senate Majority Leader David Hogue, and Senate Minority Leader Kathy Hogan have been meeting to discuss who should be named to serve on the Commission. The apparent hope was that conferring in such a manner might build consensus but, so far, it appears to have failed in that objective.

The impasse revolves around whether to reappoint Murray Sagsveen to the Commission. The Ethics Commission, itself, and the Legislators involved seem to favor doing so, but the Governor opposes it, citing a desire to “reset“ the commission with new members.

Sagsveen’s term expired this summer (he’d been appointed last year to fill a vacant unexpired term). Ward Koeser’s term (he isn’t seeking reappointment) also expired this summer but he apparently continues to act as a Commissioner, along with Sagsveen, despite the expirations. Two other sitting Commission members’ terms expire in two years but another seat is currently vacant, following the death of former Commission Chairman Dave Anderson early this year.

Armstrong’s hesitancy to reappoint Sagsveen apparently goes deeper than his desire for new blood on the Commission. He believes that the Commission is exceeding its Constitutional authority and has infringed upon the power of the branch of government he oversees, as we’ve written previously. Hogue reportedly agrees.

Sagsveen also believes that the Commission’s authority has been unconstitutionally limited by acts of the Legislature and stated so on his candidate questionnaire. This is troubling, considering the origins of the Commission, those who drove its creation, and the dangers it presents to traditional Constitutional governance in North Dakota.

The three officials plan to meet soon to continue the discussion. 

The disagreement may be more about control of the Commission than mere continuity. If Sagsveen is reappointed the majority of Commissioners will apparently be incumbents. If not, the majority will consist of new members.

Armstrong’s desire to bring new blood to the Commission is apparently rooted in hope that it will constrain its actions to what the Constitution and the law allow, which is both limited and murky. “Continuity”, which both Hogue and Hogan seem to favor, may make that less likely. 

A fresh start with a majority of the members being newcomers may bring a true “reset” about.