Last Week's Question of the Week asked whether Montana deserved the "F" rating given it by the Center for Public Integrity for the state's loopholes in personal public-disclosure laws for governor. (Also flunking were all of Montana's neighbors: North and South Dakota, Wyoming and Idaho.)

Among 293 responses to this unscientific poll, 184 said the poor grade was deserved while 109 said it was not. (We also got a call from Gov. Brian Schweitzer, who emphatically agreed that Montana's ethics laws deserve an "F." He noted that in each of the last two legislative sessions he has tried to get stronger laws passed, only to have them killed. However, he said he personally acts as if stronger laws were on the books by revealing his tax returns and keeping a log of every small gift he "or my dog" receives.)

Some other readers' comments:

n The whole idea here appears to be that governors might somehow be improperly enriching themselves, and we'd never know unless we have laws making them spell out every detail of their finances. Not necessary. Given the current political climate, it is inconceivable that such wrongdoing wouldn't come out. Anyway, we don't live in New Jersey.

n Transparency is good for everybody. The more information that's out there, the better. Why should anybody have to wonder?

n I think a bigger problem has to do with legislators turning around and becoming lobbyists, or legislators taking important jobs with state agencies. In government, appearances are everything, and this musical-chairs dance doesn't look good.