By Charlie Mitchell

Let’s try screenwriting:

SETTING: Cocktail reception for state lawmakers. Early evening. Large hotel banquet hall. Jackson.

CHARACTERS: Larry Lobbyist and Louie Lawmaker.

FIRST CONVERSATION:

Larry: Hey, Louie. How’s the session going?

Louie. Hey, Larry. Slow for now, but it will pick up.

Larry: Yes, no doubt. Look, I’ve been meaning to talk to you about that pea-picking bill. My clients don’t like it, and I’d love to tell them we can count on your vote to kill it.

Louie: It hasn’t come up yet, but if it does I’ll look at it closely.

Larry: Thanks, and say, how’s the family?

Louie: Good, good. My daughter is headed to college this fall, which will break us. But she’s a good kid. I promised her a car, but I don’t know how we’ll afford it. You don’t have any idea where we could get the money, do you?

Larry: Look. Tell her to go down to the dealership and pick out what she wants. Then you just call me and I’ll go down there and pay for it. No one has to know.

Louie: Wow. That’s really generous.

Larry: Not a problem. Now we can count on your vote against that pea-picking bill, can’t we?

Louie: You bet. Definitely. It will never see the light of day.

•••

Evidence of a crime? Yes.

Based on such a quid pro quo conversation, no jury would hesitate to conclude Larry Lobbyist and Louie Lawmaker were engaged in corruption.

•••

SECOND CONVERSATION .. a different ending.

Louie: Good, good. My daughter is headed to college this fall, which will break us. But she’s a good kid. I promised her a car, but I don’t know how we’ll afford it. You don’t have any idea where we could get the money, do you?

Larry: Look. Tell her to go down to the dealership and pick out what she wants. Then pay for it with your campaign credit card. My clients will make assorted donations to your campaign fund to total the cost. Then you just pay your credit card bill and report it as “Visa payment” on your campaign report. Itemizing isn’t required.

Louie: Wow. That’s really generous.

Larry: Not a problem. Now we can count on your vote against that pea-picking bill, can’t we?

Louie: You bet. Definitely. It will never see the light of day.

•••

Evidence of a crime? No, not in Mississippi.

Such a practice is banned in other states, but legal in Mississippi. Any campaign donation can be filtered to personal use. The only stipulation is that a violation of federal law has occurred if the official fails to report the transfer as personal income on his or her taxes.

•••

Are lawmakers aware of all these artful dodges, methods to legally extract fees for favors? Yes.

Do all of them take payoffs? No.

But those who don’t approve of those who do, at least tacitly, by failing to require itemization and reporting.

For all the years these machinations have existed, the Legislature as a whole, has never seen a need to bring such practices to an end.

Legislation to effect a cure passed the Senate this year, but was derailed in the House, which opted to commission a study. House members indicated approval of requiring itemizations on credit card bills, but has balked at anything past that. Why?

It needs more study. That’s right. As Sen. Chris McDaniel, R-Ellisville, said, the same people who provided $600 million in tire plant incentives in two hours need more information about campaign fund diversions.

It’s not too late to take a stand for honesty and more transparency in this year’s session.

But it’s not likely to happen.

Bless our pea-picking hearts.

Charlie Mitchell is a Mississippi journalist. Write to him at cmitchell43@yahoo.com.