An editorial from The Exponent Telegram
CLARKSBURG, W.Va. — Last week the House Ethics Committee “rebuked” West Virginia Rep. David McKinley, R-1st District, for not changing the name of his engineering firm when he was elected.
For the sake of clarity, a rebuke is in effect a mild, public scolding. It’s nothing major, which is good in this case because the mistake McKinley made is based on a rule that forces those elected to Congress to remove their names from any businesses that charge fees for professional services.
McKinley’s engineering and architecture firm fits the bill, although one would hardly see the harm of leaving an elected official’s name on a business.
To us, this appears to be much to do about nothing. Once sold, McKinley had no say in changing the name, yet he was punished for that failure.
That came after the House Ethics Committee and McKinley went back and forth on the matter for six years. In all seriousness, don’t you think the Ethics Committee had more important matters to consider?
But the whole process calls into question how elected officials are expected to return to public life — or perhaps in this climate of career politicians, they aren’t.
McKinley has made it clear that he isn’t a career politician. And he has served as someone who isn’t looking to hang around Washington forever. He is pragmatic, lending a matter-of-fact scientific approach to his decision making.
Certainly, the firm shouldn’t prosper from McKinley’s congressional service and he would have had to remove himself from any potential conflict.
But to force elected officials to divest their prior careers seems far too restrictive in attracting new candidates, while also fostering the career politician mindset.
McKinley steadfastly believes his actions were above board and didn’t warrant the committee’s rebuke. And we agree.
The House Ethics Committee should have moved on long ago to far more pressing matters.
