Regulating Ethics in Politics: Advisory Opinions and Agency Operations

Katya Valasek:

We're joined today by Amanda Arriaga, General Counsel for the Texas Ethics Commission. The Texas Ethics Commission is a state agency that enforces Texas's laws on campaign finance, lobbying, and financial disclosure. It reviews complaints against candidates and public officials, issues guidance on what the law requires, and can find people who break the rules.

Amanda, let's start with the structure of your agency. There's the governing board, which is made up of eight commissioners appointed by a few different elected officials. And then there's the staff, including you.

Is your position appointed also?

Amanda Arriaga:

Yes, the executive director and the general counsel positions are appointed by the commission as a whole.

Katya Valasek:

So tell me how you got that position. Was it something that you knew you wanted to strive for, or did someone see the work you were doing elsewhere and think that you'd be a good fit?

Amanda Arriaga:

I have always loved public service, so I worked for the Texas state government for a long time. And then I took a little break and worked for my family business for a while. And then I actually just saw this opening and applied.

What drew me to it is that this board is appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor, and the speaker. But per the Constitution, it has to be bipartisan, which means that anytime there's a vote, at least five people have to agree. So we have four Republicans, four Democrats.

This makes it a very balanced agency. There's no egos. There's no politics, even though we're talking about politics all the time.

And so that really drew me to this, because I like to do public service. I don't necessarily want to work on anybody's agenda specifically. And this group has no agenda.

As you said, we get questions from the public, and then we talk to the commission about them, and they make all the decisions. And knowing that we're going to a neutral agency that can't be abolished is a really freeing thing to be able to do. What draws you to public service?

I never thought it was my job to help rich people make more money. So I always wanted to be a lawyer to help people. Even going into law school, I knew that my path would be working somewhere for the state or federal government.

I was really lucky that in college and law school, I was able to find some cool internships and clerkships. I went to Washington, D.C. for four summers, fell in love with the government. And then because I got into a law school at our state capital, I started doing clerkships during the school year with our lieutenant governor and our governors at the time.

And I think it's very noble. Everyone that wants to be a lawyer says they want to do it to make a difference. And I thought doing it at the state capital level with the executive branch level made sense that I could impact a lot of people all at once rather than one case at a time.

My pitch to anyone who wants to be a lawyer is consider public service, but specifically the executive and legislative branch. Everybody wants to be a judge. And I always hear, I want to be a judge because I want to change the law.

But that's not where you change the law. You change the law from the legislative branch. You implement it in the executive branch.

Katya Valasek:

So you had been working in Texas government for a while before this position crossed your path. You saw the opening. You applied because it is an appointment and not necessarily just a job offer.

Were there different things in the interview process than someone may encounter when they're interviewing for another job in the private sector?

Amanda Arriaga:

I think the most confusing part was understanding when I was given the job, I had an application in an interview process like any other job. And I met with the executive director, the interim general counsel, and we did the traditional interview process. And then as I was meeting with the commissioners, sometimes it would be confusing because they would talk about my future role with the agency.

And I would think, do I have a future role with the agency? I had to wait until the next commission meeting for them to formally approve me in a public meeting. I guess it's possible that they could say no for some reason the day of.

But I think that was the difference is not knowing that I had a job that was secure because they couldn't have an offer until then.

Katya Valasek:

Right. That is interesting. I guess that's similar to fellowships that need the grant to come through to know whether or not the opportunity will be there.

Another thing that may be potentially more opaque when comparing what you do to other jobs that lawyers do is identifying who your client is. Who do you consider your client?

Amanda Arriaga:

My client is the agency as a whole, and what has been proven is that when the commissioner, the executive director ask a question, they are actually asking for my legal answer, not for the answer that they would hope that would make the easiest path. In several commission meetings, we've had to deal with sensitive issues related to contracts and different opinions. And it is true that they're looking for the best answer, not just an answer that would suit their purposes.

Katya Valasek:

So what are some of the types of matters that you handle for the commission? What are the issues across your desk?

Amanda Arriaga:

I serve as the de facto deputy director, so I oversee the general counsel's office where members of the public ask questions. They can ask them informally through our helpline, or they can ask them formally through advisory opinions. But there is also a sense that we're a small agency and we needed expertise and leadership in just how a state agency runs.

And that happens to be something that I have done before. So I get to work with all of the division directors on legislative funding requests, the strategic plan, all of the agency contracts, how HR processes should work. So it is sometimes a very legal general counsel position and it is sometimes more of an administrative role.

But I like both of those.

Katya Valasek:

So when you're interacting with the public, you refer to them as asking questions. Do those sometimes take the form of complaints?

Amanda Arriaga:

There are sometimes complaints, though we have a division of lawyers that handles real complaints. A lot of times what we have is a brand new person wants to run for office to serve their local community and they don't know how to fill out the paperwork. And the paperwork can be scary.

So we have people that are just trying to make a difference and literally don't understand the hundreds of pieces of paper that they're filling out. Those come in through what we call our helpline. I mean, we have wonderful attorneys that are literally answering the phone or answering an email to help those customers.

And then we have folks that are asking for a formal what we call advisory opinions. And that might be a situation where they're asking about how the revolving door policy in Texas relates to them. So they were a commissioner of a big agency.

It's been less than two years. Can they go work for this company that does something related to what they did before? And those questions have to be very specific.

It has to be about them. And they get to rely on the answer. So if the commission approves the opinion, five of them have to approve it in order for it to work, then the person, if they got in trouble later, could say, well, the ethics commission said I could do this exact thing or that I still hadn't meet the standard yet to be able to move forward.

So we have real people are relying on this advice. And that is an interesting thing that I'm not sure that every state agency gets to do.

Katya Valasek:

They're relying on this advice, but are you their legal counsel? Is there attorney client privilege in these conversations or do they need their own counsel to help them with legal issues that may arise? As you said in the “But they said I could do this” scenario.

Amanda Arriaga:

Yes, I'm glad you asked. We are absolutely not their legal counsel. And one of the problems is some people might ask a question and leave out some of the facts.

So with the helpline, we make it a standard to say we're not your legal counsel. Fill out your forms however you see fit. For the advisory opinion, there's usually language that says if the facts that are presented in this way are accurate, then X, Y, Z, because what you couldn't rely on is asking a question that left out a big chunk of what you were doing.

And our lawyers follow up and ask more questions because the questions are so specific. It's not necessarily an apples for apples. We told Commissioner of State Agency X that they could do it, so Commissioner Y can automatically do it because the facts are likely different for every personalized scenario.

Katya Valasek:

So as you're exploring these facts, what is the source of law? How do you decide what's applicable in the situation?

Amanda Arriaga:

Our Texas statutes, we have been around for 30 years, so we'll look at our Texas election code, the government code, the code of that particular agency. Whatever jurisdiction they fall under. And we have hundreds of former advisory opinions.

So you'll see a lot of the opinions cite themselves and say, well, 20 years ago when a similar question was asked, the answer was X. And because this is a similar question, the answer of X is likely still the same. So there's a lot of research that's involved.

But again, tomorrow, if you ask a question that's slightly different, our lawyers never just say, I don't know, just look over there. They typically will have to start fresh and do all that research again.

Katya Valasek:

So I'm curious, you keep talking about the lawyers who do X, Y or Z. What do you do when it comes to an advisory opinion?

Amanda Arriaga:

So I have a brilliant team of lawyers that are the drafters. I'm one of the reviewers of that. I'll give some feedback.

And then during the commission meetings, if the commissioners ask questions, I would be the person that's helping to answer those questions. And I keep calling them my brilliant team of lawyers because they are brilliant and they've been there a lot longer than I have. I have been there less than a year.

And one of the things I've learned is there's no reason to compete with the people who are smarter than you. So my people who answer advisory opinions and have done that for years, they should do that. They should do their research, that's second nature to them.

What I am best at is contracts and HR and administrative operations. So I went to fill that niche instead. And certainly I'm available.

Sometimes the attorneys will ask me, can I give them a tone check to make sure that the answer that we're giving to somebody is appropriate and maybe not snarky or too highfalutin that nobody would understand it.

Katya Valasek:

What other things are you issue spotting, let's say, when you review these opinions in addition to the tone checks? What other things are on your radar?

Amanda Arriaga:

Well, having been in state government for a long time, sometimes my question is, are you sure? When we talk about revolving door, a lot of times, at least in Texas, that means with contracts. You can't work for a company that you gave a contract to.

And so sometimes what I can bring to the table is when I read the opinion is, “Well, my gut says that you could do that. Or my gut says that when I saw this happen, it was appropriate because.” So I'm sort of reading it as a regular person.

Our commissioners haven't necessarily seen every opinion either because they have different terms. So I'm trying to anticipate the questions that they'll ask as well as just sort of a regular person. How would a regular person interpret this problem?

Katya Valasek:

Once you provide an advisory opinion, can someone appeal it if they don't like what they receive?

Amanda Arriaga:

No, the answer is the answer.

Katya Valasek:

Do you think that the HR experience that you've had in the past is critical to your success in this role as you're reviewing some of the advisory opinions that cross your path?

Amanda Arriaga:

I think it's critical in general at the agency. Not all lawyers get to have the experience of managing people. And that's important to do.

Having management discussions is painful when you have to tell someone this was not perfect. Let's change things. Let's communicate with this person a little bit differently.

That's a skill that lawyers don't always have. For a lot of the litigators that I know, it's just this is what I think and I'm right and this is how we do it. Being able to grow people and ask my favorite question when I come into a new job is to ask my team what they want to do when they grow up so that I can figure out can we put you in the place where you can succeed?

So if a person says, I don't feel comfortable public speaking, but I would love to give more presentations. Well, there's actually a fix for that. I once oversaw a communications director who said that she wanted to be in charge of contracts.

And I thought, oh, my God, we're best friends now because no one ever wants to be in charge of contracts. So to be able to have difficult conversations or maybe uncomfortable conversations with staff is essential. But also with commissioners to say, I have to give you advice that I don't think that you'll like, but I'm obligated to give it to you.

Those HR skills also work with contracts. You can be heavy handed with a vendor and say, “we will do this because I said so.” Or we can go and say, “golly, I need your help.” And I know that we want the same thing. I want to get a service. You want to get paid. How can we get there? So those HR skills work at every part of an agency operation.

Katya Valasek:

How did you learn these skills? Was it one job in particular or was it something that you honed over time?

Amanda Arriaga:

I was a business management major in college and then I went to law school and so I have no skills. I always say my only skill set is fancy talking because I didn't… I don't feel like I learned how to do anything but communicate with people. And as my jobs changed, when I first started right out of law school, I was a policy advisor for our then governor, Rick Perry, and I was an individual contributor.

And then my first job was I was head of government relations for the Department of Public Safety and I oversaw four people and I got a management book and I realized the four people have to want to work with you. Managing four people is different than managing 4000. And so every job that I had sort of increased in scope and increased in size of employees.

So when I when I oversaw the driver's license division, there were 3000 employees. I couldn't necessarily help every single one with their problems. So instead, my job was to look at an aggregate and see what do they need.

I absolutely have to go and testify in front of legislative committees to get funding that we need. So my proudest accomplishment was probably convincing the legislature years ago that we needed to give our driver license employees a raise. And it was at a time where they kept saying that this is the worst service in all of state government.

And we were able to give these staff a raise from $26,000 to $35,000 purely because of the convincing we were able to do with this dramatic flowchart. So 100 percent to me, that's like my biggest case that I won was being able to do that.

Katya Valasek:

So we've talked a lot about advisory opinions. Does that take up the majority of your day working with your team on those? What else are you doing in the day to day?

Amanda Arriaga:

That does not take the majority of my day. The majority of my day is actually to do the administrative operations like the big agency contracts. We have contracts that the general counsel's division has, but the agency as a whole has contracts.

And there was a need when I first started to make sure that we really understood them, that we were doing them appropriately, the letter of the law and all the corresponding things that go along with those contracts.

Katya Valasek:

When do you get involved in the contracts? Are you there at the original bid for proposal? Are you trying to identify where you may need contracts or are you stepping in once there's paperwork being exchanged and some idea of what the end goal is?

Amanda Arriaga:

It's all of that. I started last October. So there were clearly some contracts that were already in flight that sort of just needed management around it to make sure that we were getting everything out of them that we wanted to.

And then since I've started, there have been some that I have been with since initiation and then on the contract team going to all of the meetings to make sure that we're ending up with what we need. Every state entity that gets public money has a lot of scrutiny on their contracts. And most people think contracts are boring.

They're easy. There's something that you sign and you don't worry about. But there's usually stuff in them that somebody missed. So if we forgot to put in the scope and then also do this thing, we can't get it then. So one of the things I've been able to do is I think it's fun. Maybe not everybody thinks it's fun, but I love giving contract training and talking about how the rules in Texas got to where they want to be because there's almost always a name of a person.

So-and-so did a bad thing. And so now everybody has to change the rules for how they do it. So coming in, making sure that the agency knew all those ins and outs, because it does sound-we're a small agency. It does sound like a lot of work to fill out what you want. Why do you want to pitch it around when you think, like, I just I just need the software because I do. Leave me alone.

So to be able to explain these are the rules, even if it's not a lot of money, it's not our money. I think the reason I love contracts for state entities is this is never our money. It's the public's money. So we owe the public the scrutiny to make sure that we are getting everything that they paid for.

Katya Valasek:

How do you navigate the pressure that I assume you must feel from time to time because of the fact that you can't make everyone happy? So you're spending the public's money on various contracts, on various things. How do you find the confidence to know that this is the right step? This is the right next move for us. This is the next product. This is the next whatever.

Amanda Arriaga:

There's confidence because there's the law. Working for the state police, sometimes I would feel pushback that felt like, well, your little civilian law about contracts can't be as important as what I'm doing. Well, the law is a law and we can't just give contracts to vendors that we're friends with.

We can't give multimillion dollar contracts without a bid. And so I don't know where the self-confidence comes from other than the law itself and headlines in the paper and asking, do you want to be the one in the paper that said because I want it, because I need it now, because this is what I choose? Also in those meetings and those trainings, I would put on the highest heels I have to look as imposing and try to make myself as big as I could, like I'm fighting with a bear.

So I think it's the law and it's high heels.

Katya Valasek:

Do you also do some work on campaign finance issues?

Amanda Arriaga:

Those come through those advisory opinions and the helpline. And I haven't been through this yet, but where I imagine many changes happen is during our legislative session. And that happens in Texas for six months every two years.

So it is my understanding that there will be a lot of ideas that have to do with campaign finance, election, lobby laws. And then part of my role will be to help explain to the legislature which of those would be helpful and which might make it more of a burden for some of our customers who are just trying to fill out those forms.

Katya Valasek:

So your role is a mix of law, policy and project management. You seem to love all of those components. Is that what you expected when you took this role?

Amanda Arriaga:

Yes, because one of the questions I asked the executive director was, what are you looking for? Because I knew I wasn't an expert in all of these laws. It would be really hard to be an expert if you didn't grow up inside the agency.

And the answer I got was someone to help with contracts and agency operations. So lucky for me that that was a fit.

Katya Valasek:

So you mentioned earlier that when you start a new position, you like to ask the people on your team, what do you want to be when you grow up? What do you want to do when you grow up? You're relatively new in this position.

Do you already have things on your radar that you want to grow into as you continue to spend time in this role?

Amanda Arriaga:

You know, I'm not sure that what I want to do when I grow up is in this agency or in state government per se. I love government. I love watching.

I love the legislative session. What I want to do when I grow up is educate the public about what is happening. So I'm not sure that that can happen within the government, but I would love to talk about the government like it's football and explain, if you see this person out at happy hour with this person, this bill is going to get filed and that law is going to pass.

And I just want everyone to be informed and know the reason that the law is changing is because of X. And I think if they knew that, maybe they would care more to vote and to care who our representatives are. So I know what I want to do when I grow up and I love working here. So I think that's a retirement job for me one day.

Katya Valasek:

So your one exception to the governmental work that you do is the short time you spent at your family's commercial real estate company. Did you know that was going to be a short stint or was it something that you wanted to explore more fully?

Amanda Arriaga:

I didn't know how long it would be, but there has always been this idea of, you know, if I wanted to do talking about the government, if I wanted to run for office, you can't do that working for the state. And my family has always had this commercial real estate business. I'm from South Texas and most of the people I grew up with, if you have a lawyer in the family, everybody works for the business.

And so I tried to be a rebel by saying I will not do that. I will work for other people and I will make a difference that way. So it was nice to come home literally and work with my family because I understood who I am helping.

And it's such a fun group because every day my family loves structure. So every day we have breakfast together, breakfast meeting, 8 a.m. talking about the day, and then everyone goes to the office together. And then at noon, lunch meeting, everybody's talking about the day.

And then we go back to the office. I think if I had started my career with them, I might have thought, oh, it's just mom and dad are saying I do a good job, but that's not real because they would tell any of their kids they're doing a good job. So it was nice to have the perspective of, oh, I'm really a grown up and good at contracts and good at real estate.

And I am helpful and I can see that direct line. And my dad and my brother love to do realtor associations as much as I love to do all my extracurriculars with bar associations. So it was also a time I knew working with them, I could be involved in anything I wanted.

I could make time to do all of those other cool things and I wouldn't have to convince my boss why that was important. And then when this opportunity came, I think that they knew at some point probably the state would win me back, but they were not jealous. They weren't sad.

My dad believes we're going to come back one day anyway.