>For most elected officials (that have broad scope of potential jurisdiction and thus are almost impossible to avoid conflicts of interests), blind trusts are p

>For most elected officials (that have broad scope of potential jurisdiction and thus are almost impossible to avoid conflicts of interests), blind trusts are probably even better. Most elected officials (almost all federally) already employ blind trusts. >For most public servants, even those that have decision-making authority that could potentially raise conflict interests, disclosure and recusal rules are probably all that is needed (and, actually, lots of public servants have no decision–making authority that is likely to even require that.) True there are many levels and for lower level (comptrollers and such) that is probably fine. For senators, representatives, judges, etc. the index/bond fund would be even better than the blind trust, since these index funds are publicly inspectable, passively managed, and anyone can buy them.