To Hire (Or Not To Hire) A Relative
By Ginger Sampson
Nov/Dec 2001
If you wanted to work for the federal government in the early 19th century, it was customary to donate to a politician running for office. If he won, a job was your reward. This practice of giving jobs as compensation for party loyalty became known as the "spoils system." In the 1880s, the assassination of President James Garfield by a disappointed man who had been denied a government job, increased public support for a growing civil service movement. This led to the Pendleton Act of 1883. This act was America's first attempt to reduce nepotism in the federal government, and brought about state civil service reform two years later in New York and Massachusetts.
Today, nearly half of all state legislatures have laws prohibiting a legislator from hiring a relative. And, all 50 states have laws that either prohibit or suggest guidelines for conflict-of-interest situations, which may include nepotism restrictions depending on interpretation of the law.
States With Nepotism Laws for Legislators. Nepotism is prohibited by 19 state legislatures either through statute or by constitution. Laws differ by the degree of a legislator's hiring jurisdiction and by exceptions created within statute. Many states regulate the degree of relationship permitted between a legislator and a hired relative.
Degrees of relationship determine how one person is related to another by consanguinity (i.e., blood) or affinity (i.e., marriage). Arizona, Iowa, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico and Oklahoma restrict legislators from hiring an individual related within the third degree by blood or marriage. This includes a legislator's spouse, sibling, child, grandchild, great-grandchild, niece, nephew, grand-niece or -nephew, first cousin, second cousin and first cousin once-removed. Texas, Missouri and Montana also name the degree of relationship not allowed, but hold different restrictions for relatives related by blood than those by marriage. Some states do not define the degree at which a relative cannot be hired, leaving the final authority to interpret and rule on nepotism cases to their respective state ethics committees or commission.
Almost 50 percent of states with restrictions allow a legislator's relative to be employed in the other chamber or by another legislator in the same chamber. A few states, including Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland and Wyoming, prohibit a legislator not only from directly hiring a relative, but also from influencing their employment in either chamber of the legislature.
Some states have created exceptions within their nepotism prohibitions. Florida and Montana allow a legislator's relatives to be employed as pages during sessions. Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Dakota and Texas make exceptions for employees hired before a related legislator's election to office. If a legislator's physical impairment requires the hiring of specific relatives, nepotism is allowed in Maryland and Texas. A few states, including Iowa and New Mexico, also include exemptions if the relative is paid $600 or less a year.
States Without Nepotism Laws for Legislators. While the remaining 30 states have not passed a statute directly prohibiting a legislator from employing a relative, each one does uphold general ethical considerations and rules for conflict-of-interest violations. The language within their existing statutes, such as "granting unwarranted privileges," "employment which could impair the legislator's judgment," "participating in matters concerning family members" or "securing financial benefits for family members" could restrict situations involving nepotism. As with states with direct nepotism restrictions, these states look to their ethics committees or commission for advice and final authority on whether or not a nepotism incident could be construed as a violation. A number of states with no direct nepotism prohibition in statute do, however, provide hiring guidelines for legislators.
Ethical Perspectives of Nepotism. For the states without specific nepotism laws, is it wrong for a legislator to hire a family member? If one looks at the private sector, it is not uncommon for small, family-owned businesses to hire family members. Most corporations, however, uphold a human resource policy that prohibits a family member from supervising a relative. Nepotism in business, as in public service, brings both costs and benefits. The positive aspects of nepotism include: lower recruiting costs; less employee turnover; higher levels of loyalty, trust and satisfaction; and a sense of "ownership," according to the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Those businesses that discourage nepotism do so because it may cause problems with favoritism, discipline, fraud, confidentiality and liability.
For legislators, additional factors must be considered-most prominently, the use of public funds and the principles of democracy. The question is: Are ethical standards lowered when a legislator hires someone based purely on relationships, instead of merit, to the detriment of a more deserving candidate? Some legislators and constituents may support cases of nepotism based on economic reasons. Considering that a majority of state legislatures operate part-time on small budgets, the funds required to hire an educated, hard-working assistant are limited. A relative may be more willing to work long hours for a lower salary. In contrast, nepotism could be perceived by the public as a conflict of interest. Other individuals may simply reject nepotism, saying that merit alone should be the arbiter of success in a democracy. While the ethics of nepotism are debatable, the number of legislatures enacting these self-imposed limitations is increasing.
Selected References
A full 50-state list of nepotism laws can be found on the Center of Ethics in Government's Web site at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/ethics/e_nepotism.htm
Frank J. Thompson, ed. Revitalizing State and Local Public Service. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1993.
Henry Campbell Black, ed. Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1979.
University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School. Hiring Relatives: Plus or Minus for the Bottom Line? Philadelphia, Penn., 2001.
Please contact the author for a copy or view the Adobe Acrobat version. Adobe Version, using your NCSL username and password
Contacts for More Information |
Eye On Ethics
