Memorandum on Ethical Conduct on the Part of Government Officers and Employees

Note: Executive Order 11222 of May 8, 1965, is entitled "Prescribing Standards of Ethical Conduct for Government Officers and Employees" (30 F.R. 6469; 3 CFR, 1965 Supp., p. 130; see also 1965 volume, this series, Item 241 ).

The report from John W. Macy, Jr., Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, dated June 9, 1966, was made public by the White House on June 17. The report, in the form of a memorandum to the President, follows:

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Ethical Conduct of Government Officers and Employees

Significant benefits are resulting from the new standards of ethical conduct which you established a year ago, May 8, 1965, by Executive Order 112220 Indeed, the clarity and emphasis of your intentions on this matter have produced an entirely new climate of concern among executive branch personnel--a healthy, everyday concern--for impeccable conduct and meticulous avoidance of conflict of interest. And this heightened awareness is becoming well known to the business community, to political scientists and to the press.

True, the new standards are high and their strict limitations on acceptance of gifts, entertainment or favors have brought minor grumblings, from within and outside the Government, since they require substantial change from past practices in some cases. However, the amount of such complaint is not large and, in my judgment, is far outweighed by an increased confidence among employees and the public generally that agencies of the executive branch have joined in common cause to achieve both the appearance and the reality of honest, fair and impartial conduct of the public's business.

Question also has been raised whether the proclamation of strict ethical requirements, such as those concerning gifts and favors and the disclosure of outside business and financial interests, does not in itself impugn the integrity of public officials and thereby make public service less attractive. I find this question is largely academic. There is no evidence whatever during this first year that uncompromising ethical standards, publicly known, adversely affect the recruitment or retention of persons of high quality and integrity in the Government service.

Top Presidential Appointees

One innovation of the new program was the requirement that the heads of executive departments and agencies, full-time members of boards and commissions, and certain appointees in the Executive Office of the President furnish me a confidential statement of outside employment and financial interests. About 165 top officials were covered by this provision.

My review of their statements has revealed that, by and large, your appointees are persons of relatively modest means and have carefully restricted their outside interests. The disclosure requirement has not been onerous, even though it involves quarterly reports of changes.

In a few cases, I have had to go back to the individual concerned to discuss stock holdings or business connections which indicated a possible conflict with official responsibilities. So far all questions have been resolved through clarification of the facts or adjustment in the arrangements that gave rise to the question. As of this time, there are about four such cases on which I have discussions pending in order to insure that your standards are fully met.

The disclosure requirement for top Presidential appointees has had this good effect of eliminating some potential individual problems. It also has been beneficial as leadership example to other key agency officials who must report outside employment and financial interests under the requirements of CSC and agency regulations.

Commission and Agency Regulations

The Commission's regulations under the order established a uniform pattern and minimum requirements for agency regulations throughout the executive branch. They carry forward the ethical standards of the order and incorporate general standards of employee conduct on related matters such as gambling, lobbying, misuse of privileges, and other conduct prejudicial to the Government. Agency heads may supplement these minimum standards with requirements suited to their particular needs,

Additionally, the CSC regulations provide for counseling and advisory service to employees and establish procedures for remedial or disciplinary action as needed to enforce the standards. Each agency head has designated a top-ranking employee as counselor and as his representative to the Commission for program coordination.

Each agency's regulations are being published in the Federal Register. This is an extremely useful innovation. It has ensured a thoughtful review and careful drafting of ethical policies and practices related to the agency's mission, while taking into account the proper rights and privileges of employees. It directs the attention of the press and those who do business with the Government to your firm intention that the affairs of Government are to be conducted openly, honorably, honestly and impartially. And it constitutes legal notice to the business community of the bounds of propriety in relationships with Federal officers and employees.

The review and coordination of agency regulations --62 executive departments and agencies-has been time consuming but a rewarding task. Central assistance by the Commission has achieved a common interpretation of the order and its intentions, a force and clarity in drafting, and a pooling of useful approaches to the delineation of propriety in difficult or awkward situations that face Federal officials--for example, in agencies which have at once both the responsibility for promoting the interests of a segment of private business and for regulating some aspects of its affairs. The new regulations reflect a number of changes in agency practices which have been brought about by their heightened awareness of ethical considerations.

Conclusion

I am gratified by the attitude of serious purpose which has characterized agency implementation of the new ethical standards. Experience may reveal ways in which further improvement can be made, but during this first year there has been no indication that any revision of Executive Order 11222 is needed or desirable. All indications are that the innovations of the order are a major step forward in ensuring the maintenance of high ethical standards and the confidence of the public in the integrity of officers and employees in the executive branch.

JOHN W. MACY, JR. Chairman