Alaskan lawmakers have been busy strategizing how to continue campaign fundraising ahead of the July 11 special session.

State statute bans lawmakers from soliciting or accepting contributions in the capital city or any municipality where the Legislature is convened.

Despite calls by some lawmakers to hold the session in Anchorage due to a lodging shortage in Juneau, the formal legislative session will remain in Juneau allowing political fundraising to continue in Anchorage.

Photo of the chamber of the Alaska House of Representatives by L’Aquatique on Wikimedia Commons.

The City Council of Côte Saint-Luc passed a formal resolution stating opposition to proposed changes to Quebec’s Lobbying Transparency and Ethics Act.

The council opposes the measure that would require nonprofit groups to register as lobbyists. The resolution is being sent to the Quebec Lobbyists Commissioner and the Minister of Quebec Intergovernmental Affairs.

San Jose City Council approved an ordinance amending the definition of “committee” to increase the qualifying threshold for the receipt of contributions from $1,000 to $2,000 to be consistent with the Political Reform Act. The ordinance will go into effect July 28, 2016.

Federal:

Can Super PACs Be Put Back in the Box?
Washington Post – Matea Gold | Published: 7/6/2016

A powerhouse legal team representing a bipartisan group of members of Congress and candidates is unleashing a new effort to overturn the case that gave rise to super PACs, part of a new strategy to rein in the big money that has poured into campaigns since 2010. They are targeting a case decided by U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2010: SpeechNow.org v. FEC. That decision permitted a conservative group to raise money beyond the contribution limits placed on traditional PACs because it planned to spend its funds independently of a candidate or party. In doing so, the appellate court paved the way for new political vehicles, later dubbed super PACs for their ability to accept unlimited amounts from individuals and corporations.

F.B.I. Director James Comey Recommends No Charges for Hillary Clinton on Email
New York Times – Mark Landler and Eric Lichtblau | Published: 7/5/2016

FBI Director James Comey said his agency is recommending that no charges be brought against Hillary Clinton in connection with her email use while secretary of State. “No reasonable prosecutor” would bring such a case, Comey said. But although the FBI is not recommending charges, Comey did strongly criticize Clinton’s handling of classified information in her email, calling is “extremely careless.” The announcement comes three days after FBI agents and Justice Department officials interviewed Clinton. The FBI has been seeking to determine whether Clinton or any of her aides had mishandled classified information in connection with her email. The inspector general of the intelligence agencies had said the emails contained information that was classified at the time they were sent but were not marked classified, and the information should never have been sent on an unclassified system.

Koch Brothers’ Plight Likened to That of Civil Rights Workers in the 1950s
Center for Public Integrity – John Dunbar | Published: 7/5/2016

Charles and David Koch and civil rights pioneers have faced threats and harassment from those who disagree with their views, and each is entitled to privacy when it comes to disclosing certain kinds of information to the government, a federal judge ruled. But the decision has been controversial; comparing the travails of billionaires to the violent threats endured by civil rights workers in the 1950s is more than a stretch, say some of those familiar with the case – it is offensive. The case represents just the latest front in an ongoing battle being waged by a range of mostly conservative groups attempting to keep donors to political nonprofits hidden from view. Many of the legal battles revolve around interpretation of a crucial civil rights case from 1958: NAACP v. Alabama.

Lockheed’s Top Government Affairs Official Not Registered as Lobbyist
Politico – Austin Wright and Jeremy Herb | Published: 7/3/2016

The top government affairs official at Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest defense contractor, has not registered as a lobbyist. The company maintains that Robert Rangel, its senior vice president for government affairs since early last year, is not required to disclose his efforts to influence Congress and the executive branch. He does not meet all the legal requirements outlined in the law that governs lobbying disclosures, Lockheed says, including the percentage of his time he actually spends trying to influence government officials. His decision not to register, however, goes against both company precedent and the practices of other top defense firms.

Special Interests Look to Influence Political Conventions – Discreetly
Center for Public Integrity – Carrie Levine | Published: 7/7/2016

Corporations, unions, and other special interests will spend tens of millions of dollars to bankroll festivities at the Democratic and Republican national conventions. Some high-profile companies and individual donors are scaling back on giving to the host committees as they want to distance themselves from controversies surrounding Donald Trump. Meanwhile, many special interests will participate in convention-related activities, but they have become more creative in how they influence conventioneers, or are refusing to discuss their convention plans. “They want to show up, they want to rub elbows with everyone at the conventions, they just don’t want the corporate name out there,” said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen who has tracked influence efforts at the conventions.

The Lobbying Reform That Enriched Congress
Politico – Isaac Arnsdorf | Published: 7/3/2016

In the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal, Democrats seized on the chaos to retake both chambers of Congress, promising voters they would change what they called a “culture of corruption.” Their attempt to make good on that promise, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, was embraced by both parties as a historic breakthrough. But critics say the result of the law is very nearly the opposite of what the American public was told it was getting at the time. Not only did the lobbying reform bill fail to slow the “revolving door,” it created an entire class of professional influencers who operate in the shadows.

From the States and Municipalities:

Connecticut – Anthem-Cigna Controversy Exposes Gaps in Ethics Rules
Connecticut Mirror – Mark Pazniokas | Published: 7/5/2016

Connecticut Insurance Commissioner Katharine Wade’s refusal to recuse herself from ruling on the Anthem-Cigna merger has provoked a reappraisal of state ethics regulators, who heavily rely on the self-reporting of public officials, and an ethics code that may be clearer to lawyers than lovers of English. Wade, a former Cigna vice president of government affairs, in February did not try to hide the fact that her staff was reviewing Anthem’s application to acquire Cigna for $54 billion. “On behalf of the Department, I signed a contract with an independent economist to assist Department staff in their review of the Anthem Form A application. Presently, there are no Cigna matters before me,” Wade wrote to the Office of State Ethics. Wade declined recently to say what basis she concluded there were no Cigna matters before her under the meaning the state ethics code, given that she already has asserted her intention to rule on the merger.

Massachusetts – Senate Slow to Embrace DeLeo Ethics Panel
Lowell Sun – Matt Murphy (State House News Service) | Published: 7/7/2016

Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo’s efforts to jumpstart a review of the state’s ethics, campaign finance, and lobbying laws has hit a roadblock in the Senate, where leaders so far have refused to go along out of concern the broad scope of the speaker’s proposed review would lead to a dead end. DeLeo had offered a resolve that would have created a joint task force of the House, Senate, and Gov. Charlie Baker’s administration to review the state’s complex ethics laws. The House referred the speaker’s proposal to a joint committee, but so far the Senate has refused to admit the bill, leaving open the possibility that the House could choose to work with the governor alone on the review.

Michigan – Unions Win Injunction Blocking Michigan Fundraising Law
Detroit News – Jonathan Oosting | Published: 7/1/2016

A U.S. District Court Judge granted a preliminary injunction against a law passed by the Michigan Legislature last year that would make it easier for corporations to deduct money from employees’ paychecks for their own PACs while forbidding them from making similar deductions on behalf of labor unions. It is the second preliminary injunction from a federal judge against a provision of the law, which also prohibited local government officials from distributing information about ballot proposals, a restriction dubbed a “gag order” by critics.

Minnesota – Lobbying in Minnesota: Spending has nearly doubled since 2002
St. Paul Pioneer Press – Rachel Stassen-Berger | Published: 7/4/2016

Special interest groups have spent $800 million lobbying government officials in Minnesota over the last 13 years. The St. Paul Pioneer Press review also found the amount of annual spending has doubled and the number of lobbying clients has tripled. Business interests have dominated the spending annually, making up about half of the lobbying expenditures every year since 2002. Utilities have spent the most, followed by the health industry. Spending or the lack thereof does not always translate to influence, however. Good lobbyists, say lobbyists and lawmakers alike, know that. “Lobbyists don’t write laws … lobbyists write ideas. Lobbyists write suggestions,” said Tom Lehman, who has been a lobbyist for 26 years.

New York – Agency Clears Mayor de Blasio and Nonprofit of Campaign Finance Violations
New York Times – Vivian Yee | Published: 7/6/2016

The New York City Campaign Finance Board determined a nonprofit closely linked to Mayor Bill de Blasio did not spend money to bolster the mayor’s re-election bid, but the board said the group’s spending raised serious policy issues. The board said Campaign for One New York’s 2014 spending was not campaign-related, primarily because it occurred so far from the mayor’s re-election race in 2017. Yet the board appeared to find much that was troublesome, if not illegal, in the behavior of the nonprofit, which has amassed millions of dollars in donations to push for City Hall initiatives. The board also clarified rules governing nonprofit advocacy groups that are affiliated with politicians.

New York – In Inquiry into Ex-Cuomo Aide, Disclosure Form Only Adds Mystery
New York Times – Vivian Yee | Published: 7/5/2016

Two companies listed in a financial disclosure form from 2014 belonging to Joseph Percoco, who for many years was New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s closest aide, seem to be at the heart of a sprawling federal investigation encircling Cuomo’s administration. One firm, Chris Pitts LLC, is named for a minor Democratic activist in rural Connecticut who, until recently, lived with his sister and got around town in an aging Chevrolet. The other, COR Development Company, is one of the most prominent real estate developers in central New York. In an investigation with few signposts for those outside the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan, Percoco’s disclosure is the nearest thing to a map key. Yet the connection between the Percoco and COR and Chris Pitts LLC. is not as straightforward as the black and white of an official form might imply.

New York – JCOPE Shut Down in Lobbying Reform
Queens Chronicle – Michelle Kraidman | Published: 6/30/2016

The Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE) in February approved an advisory opinion that required paid consultants, who “controlled the delivery” of a message to editorial boards encouraging them to support positions that were favorable to a client, to register as lobbyists. They also would have had to report their contacts with media outlets’ opinion writers. That led to great opposition as accredited media sources, and several public relations and consulting firms sued JCOPE, arguing the new regulations were unconstitutional. Now, a statement released by the governor’s office announced that the agreed-upon legislation for an ethics reform plan does not include what JCOPE had originally recommended. “[The agreement] explicitly excludes communications with journalists, including editorial boards, from the definition of lobbying and exclude these communications from lobbying regulation,” the statement said.

Rhode Island – Raimondo: Lobbying law makes rules ‘clear, simple, consistent and transparent’
Providence Journal – Jennifer Bogdan | Published: 7/6/2016

In a ceremonial signing of lobbying legislation, Rhode Island Gov. Gina Raimondo described the changes as making the rules “clear, simple, consistent, and transparent.” The legislation, which goes into effect on January 1, clarifies who is a lobbyist and what constitutes lobbying. The penalty for failure to register is a fine of up to $50,000 and revocation of lobbyist registration for up to three years. Lobbyists will also be required to file monthly public reports of their activities from January to June and quarterly reports from July to December. The reports must include all compensation received, all expenditures made, and “all money and anything of value provided or promised to any legislative or executive branch official” in excess of $250.

State and Federal Communications produces a weekly summary of national news, offering more than 60 articles per week focused on ethics, lobbying, and campaign finance.

The Multnomah County Charter Review Committee voted Wednesday to add a campaign reform ballot measure to the November ballot.

Voters will decide whether the county should amend its charter to limit campaign contributions from individuals to $500 per person per cycle for county races. The measure would also require candidates to disclose their five largest contributors on political advertisements.

The California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) has announced a project with the University of California and California Forward to update the Political Reform Act (PRA).

The FPPC plans to submit revisions based on public input from this project to the Legislature in 2017. A webinar is scheduled for Thursday, July 14, at 10 a.m. with FPPC Chair Jodi Remke to discuss the project. Interested persons can register for the webinar at www.cafwd.org/PRAtalk.

Jersey City Councilman Michael Yun has proposed changes to the city’s pay-to-play laws.

The changes would broaden the laws to include the city’s autonomous agencies as well as restrict some vendors from contributing to city elected officials seeking higher office. The proposal would also extend the ban on no-bid city contracts, from one year to four years, for those who contribute more than $300 to a candidate.

Yun, a longtime critic of Mayor Steve Fulop, claims the changes are meant to close loopholes in the current law and not to target Fulop. In the past, Fulop’s donors have received large contracts with the city Municipal Utilities Authority, an autonomous agency not bound by current pay-to-play rules. Fulop is also rumored to be considering a 2017 gubernatorial run.

Yun submitted his proposal to corporation counsel for review and hopes to receive initial approval from council at its July 13 meeting.

Photo of Jersey City by David Jones on Wikimedia Commons.

Ohio Sen. Kris Jordan recently introduced a bill to eliminate special elections in February and August.

His proposal is the result of historically low voter turnout in Ohio special elections. Fewer than 10 percent of residents usually participate in any special election, and an election can cost the state $4 to $6 million.

An attempt to place an initiative on the November ballot to overhaul state campaign finance and ethics regulations has failed.

The Keep Idaho Elections Accountable campaign, chaired by Democrat Holli Woodings, failed to collect the 48,000 signatures needed, coming up roughly 6,000 short. The initiative would have changed contribution limits, created stricter penalties for violations, and prohibited lobbyists from giving gifts valued at more than $50.

The group collected 79,000 signatures, but many were disqualified due to a lack of a current address.

Q. In what ways are my company and I allowed to get involved in the 2016 national party conventions?

A. The opportunities for individuals and companies to involve themselves in this year’s party conventions are legion, but caution must be exercised to avoid running afoul of the many intersecting laws governing your interaction with the delegates and other officials in attendance as well as the committees putting on the conventions.

Convention delegates and those seeking selection as delegates are subject to the federal contribution rules, which means corporations, labor organizations, foreign nationals and businesses, and federal contractors are not permitted to make contributions. However, those permitted to contribute may do so without limits. Delegates who are public officials are subject to the gifts laws governing the office they hold. In other words, federal officials are subject to federal gift laws, state officials are subject to state gift laws, and local officials are subject to any state and local laws applicable to their office.

Individuals and organizations seeking to become involved with the conventions may contribute to the convention host committees. The host committees are nonprofit organizations set up to encourage commerce in and project a favorable image of the convention city. Organizations and individuals may donate money and make in-kind donations to the host committee to defray the costs of the convention, including costs related to promoting the city and welcoming attendees, providing information and samples to attendees, administrative expenses, providing the use of convention facilities, transportation, law enforcement, hotel rooms, accommodations and hospitality for party site selection groups, and for other convention-related facilities and services.

Convention committees are related to the national party organizations and therefore federal campaign finance laws apply. As a result, direct and in-kind contributions using funds from a corporation, labor organization, foreign nations and businesses, and federal contractors are prohibited. Goods and services may be provided to the national committee in the ordinary course of business. Obviously, it’s quite important to distinguish the host committees from the convention committees. Thankfully, both host committees, the Cleveland 2016 Host Committee and the Philadelphia 2016 Host Committee, use the word “host” in their official names.

The national party conventions represent high profile ways to gain exposure both personally and for your organization. This high profile is also why compliance with the rules governing your dealings with committees, delegates, and attendees is so important.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: experts@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

Today, the 2016 Rhode Island Lobby Reform Act was celebrated at a ceremonial signing during a State House Library ceremony.

“This legislation provides the public with the means to easily discern who is lobbying for what, as well as, giving the Secretary of the State the means to root out those who are undermining the democratic process through unethical lobbying behavior,” said Sen. Lynch Prata, one of the bill’s sponsors, according to a State House press release.

Senate Bill 2361 and House Bill 7388, both officially signed into law on June 13, repeal the current lobbying laws in Title 22 and Title 42 in the state’s statutes and enact the Rhode Island Lobbying Reform Act. Among the changes in the bills are the simplification of lobbyists’ reporting requirements, an increase in penalties for failing to comply with lobbying requirements, and the allowance for more investigative and administrative authority for enforcing the lobbying laws, including administrative subpoena power.

The effective date for the two bills is January 1, 2017.

The Executive Branch Ethics Commission has launched a new payment application for the 2016 lobbyist employer registration fee.

The application is available on any mobile device; however, updated registration statements must be submitted directly to the Ethics Commission.

Payments may be made through the application from July 1 to July 31.

The Urban County Council is reviewing proposed changes to Lexington, Kentucky’s ethics act. The changes would be the first major overhaul of the act since 1994, when it was first enacted.

Among the proposals, the mayor will be given sole authority to appoint members of the ethics commission, with confirmation by the Council, and same-sex and domestic partners will be included in the financial disclosure requirements and prohibition against nepotism. The issue of lobbyist registration was also discussed but was dismissed because most people speaking to the council are private citizens rather than paid lobbyists.

No vote was held, but the changes will be discussed again at the Council’s November meeting.

Photo of the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government Building by Nyttend on Wikimedia Commons.

Lawmakers in Montana rejected a request for a special legislative session to address the state’s campaign finance laws.

Ten legislators called for a special session to address the law controlling contribution limits. In May, a U.S. District Court found Montana’s current law concerning political contribution limits unconstitutional. The ruling reinstated most contribution limits in place before the statute was enacted.

In order to convene the special session, 76 lawmakers, just over half the 150 total number of legislators, needed to agree to the special session. However, only 20 legislators voted in favor of a special session. Montana Public Radio reports Sen. Cary Smith, a supporter of the special session, as saying, “I know the standard is high to call a special session, and that we will be back in session in 2017 and be able to work on this issue.”

Photo of the Montana State Capitol by Maksim on Wikimedia Commons.