State report cards are in and the results are dismal when it comes to transparency and accountability by the State of Arizona.
The Center for Public Integrity recently unveiled its findings in the 2015 State Integrity Investigation, with the state receiving a solid D grade. As bad as that may sound, Arizona didn’t receive the lowest grade. The Grand Canyon State ranked 22nd when compared to other states, making it a little above average.
The grade came as a result of some key events that took place over the course of the year.
The investigation cites the Child Protective Services debacle in which stacks of client files were found in a Phoenix alley, leading to the dismantling of the department and the implementation of a new one.
There was also the “dark money” contributions used toward the election for governor and state utility regulators.
Also noted was the failed attempt of Governor Doug Ducey to establish a state inspector general, an effort that was highly criticized and labeled an attempt to create a secret police.
There were no high ranking states in the study. The top grade was a C earned by California. Eleven states earned failing grades, with Michigan coming in dead last.
According to the center, which was awarded the Pulitzer Prize in 2014 for its investigative work, there has been little progress on these issues since the State Integrity Investigation was first carried out in 2012. In fact, most scores have dropped since then, though some of that is due to changes made to improve and update the project and its methodology.
The comprehensive probe found that in state after state, open records laws are laced with exemptions, and part-time legislators and agency officials engage in glaring conflicts of interests and cozy relationships with lobbyists. It was also shown that understaffed watchdogs struggle to enforce laws that include far too many loopholes to close.
The 2015 grades are based on 245 questions about key indicators of transparency and accountability, looking not only at what the laws say, but also how well they’re enforced or implemented. The indicators are divided into 13 categories, including public access to information, political financing, electoral oversight, executive accountability, legislative accountability, judicial accountability, state budget processes, state civil service management, procurement, internal auditing, lobbying disclosure, state pension fund management and ethics enforcement agencies.
To see the investigation in its entirety, go online to publicintegrity.org.
