I've made arguments in the past about how it might be better to focus on education and communication rather than penalization, compliance measures, and that sort of thing. It seems to me that the commissioner has quite a bit on her plate right now, and she'd like to add to the list of things that she can be monitoring.
I don't know what kind of changes would have to happen in order for a real education program to be in place. By education I mean more communication, and having more of a general discussion about what standards you're trying to uphold.
If we get too focused on the rules, it would be easy to lose sight of what the point of all this is in the first place. It might help everyone to keep focused on the overall objectives if there were more of a discussion of principles.
It might also be helpful, as the commissioner herself mentioned, to spend a little more time, maybe in a review of the legislation, on the definitions of conflict of interest, such as what happens in the front end of the bill rather than in the back end.
To change those definitions and to have more going on in the front end, even that conversation would have educational implications.