On the other hand, the House did manage to advance another measure, this one by Rep. Gary Beard of Baton Rouge, a Republican, banning officials with oversight on hurricane-recovery contracts from accepting campaign contributions from those companies or individuals eligible to receive them.
So how do legislators manage to both pass and reject major ethics reforms in the same session?
"It's because there's no great public outcry," says Bryan-Paul Frost, an adjunct professor of philosophy at UL Lafayette, who has taught courses on ethics and politics. "Ethics are not a tangible sort of issue," Frost says. "They don't immediately affect voters like taxes or other things."
Still, people should be pumping their fists in the air, says Jim Brandt, president of the Public Affairs Research Council, a nonprofit group that monitors the activities of state government.
Brandt doesn't give high grades to the Legislature for its handling of ethics issues over the past few months. "We were very disappointed there weren't more robust reforms enacted during the regular session," he says. "There wasn't a whole lot that got done."
While there have been major strides in recent years -- banning fundraising during sessions, tightening lobbying rules -- Brandt says every year seems to bring with it a few backwards steps.
For instance, Rep. Hunter Greene, a Baton Rouge Republican, filed legislation he later withdrew that would have allowed his friend Patrick Mockler, co-owner of Mockler Beverage, to sell beer to the Santa Maria Golf Course while Mockler was being considered for an appointment to the Baton Rouge Recreation and Park Commission, which manages the course. And Jefferson Parish Rep. Steve Scalise's effort to abolish a little-known perk held by New Orleans-area officials -- allowing them to get people out of jail that have been charged with a municipal violation -- failed in a close vote.
Frost says the teachings of Machiavelli can help shed light on why the Legislature does what it does on matters of ethics, even if no one else can. For example, if certain politicians believe they can get away with something sinister while appearing to be moral, no matter how immoral or amoral their actions might truly be, they'll make the push. That's because, without any repercussions, sinister actions can still be made to seem virtuous.
"For an action to be moral or ethical in the political world, that depends on its ultimate success or failure," Frost says with a laugh, alluding to the fact that the perceived outcome is sometimes more important to lawmakers than the original intent.
Brandt takes a more pragmatic approach. He says lawmakers are deft at procedural maneuvers that blunt efforts for change. The committees on governmental affairs in each chamber, both of which handle ethics measures, often won't allow a bill to reach a floor vote. "It seems as though they work in tandem," Brandt says, "or they pass something they know the other house will kill."
A bill prohibiting lawmakers from accepting free concert and sporting tickets from lobbyists and other interests was approved by the Senate, but it was sent to the House and Governmental Affairs Committee during the final weeks of the session with a wink and a smile because it "has been hostile to this type of ethics reform in the past," Brandt says.
The committee did pass the measure out to the full House, but it did so with a broad amendment that was likely to catch fire in the lower chamber, supportive lawmakers in the hearing grumbled.
Bills requiring more disclosure by certain agencies and offices didn't do much better. "It has not been a good session for sunshine," Brandt says, invoking the lexicon of public records disclosure advocates. A bill that would have required public financial statements from groups seeking state money met a quiet death during the session, as did a proposal that would have made public certain documents in the Governor's office.
The latter example is the reason so many agencies want the cover of the executive branch. The executive branch's broad exemptions from the state public records law provides shade -- some would say shadow -- from the bright sunshine, says New Orleans Rep. Peppi Bruneau, who sponsored the legislation closing the loophole.
"That's why everyone wants to be in there," Bruneau lamented during a speech on the House floor earlier this month.
The reluctance of lawmakers to make sweeping changes is no surprise to Frost. "Very few people are willing to put restrictions on their own power," he says.