The state Supreme Court has struck down much of the 2010 ethics law passed by state lawmakers. Senate Bill 844 changed campaign finance laws, gave greater authority to the Missouri Ethics Commission, created new crimes for ethics violations, and required Capitol dome keys be given to all lawmakers.

The court said Tuesday the bill violated a requirement of the state Constitution that legislation not be amended to change its original purpose. The procurement portion will remain in effect because the Supreme Court concluded that was the original purpose of the legislation.

The decision upholds Circuit Judge Daniel Green’s ruling last spring.

House Resolution 1140 has set the meeting dates and dates of adjournment for the 2012 regular session of the General Assembly for the period of Friday, January 27, 2012, through Monday, March 12, 2012.

The Assembly will generally be in session during the week and in adjournment during each weekend.

The resolution also schedules adjournment for Monday, February 13, Tuesday, February 14, Thursday, March 1, Friday, March 2, Thursday, March 8, and Friday, March 9.

Any additional periods of adjournment will be set by subsequent resolutions.

The online filing system, Insight, will be offline today, January 26, from 11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. (EST). Filers who attempt to access the system during this time risk losing data.

A separate notice will be sent by the Alaska Public Offices Commission if the fix takes longer than proposed.

Questions can be addressed to Joan Mize at (907) 465-4865.

State Senator Doug Stoner has proposed legislation that would remove control of ethics enforcement from the General Assembly by making the state’s ethics commission an independent agency.

Senate Bill 315 would also change the name of the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission to the Georgia Ethics Commission.

The commission would be appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court and the chief judge of the Georgia Court of Appeals. Currently, members are appointed by legislators and the governor.

Governor Susana Martinez has endorsed legislative efforts to impose a two-year ban on lobbying for lawmakers. The forthcoming bill may also include civil or criminal penalties if legislators took lobbying jobs sooner than prescribed. All appointees of Governor Martinez have agreed to two-year bans on becoming lobbyists after leaving the position, but she wants formal legislation to hold state lawmakers to the same standard.

State Senator Dede Feldman has proposed Senate Bill 103, which would bar former legislators from lobbying for a shorter one-year period after leaving office. Currently, New Mexico’s lawmakers can quit their office and immediately begin lobbying, just as former state senator Kent Cravens did in September.

Photo of Governor Susana Martinez courtesy of the New Mexico State Government.

Senate Bill 244 proposes adding the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, the National Assembly of Sportsmen’s Caucuses and the State Agriculture and Rural Leaders Association to a statutory list of lobbyist exemptions. If the bill passes, the groups will be exempt from the gift disclosures and paid travel bans imposed on lobbyists, regardless of whether lobbying occurs at their events. This is the latest attempt at carving out exceptions to the 2010 ethics reform bill which banned lobbyist-funded, out-of-state travel for legislators.

Although lobbyists cannot directly pay for a state legislator’s trip, by simply paying for membership in an exempt group like the American Legislative Exchange Council, the lobbyists gain access to legislators. Giving a group an exemption allows legislators to travel to the group’s conferences and hunting trips, at the group’s expense, without violating the lobbying rules or having to disclose the trips.

Exempt groups claim to be established for the education and support of legislators.

Photo of the Indiana State Senate Chamber by Charles Edward on Wikipedia.

The Georgia Alliance for Ethics Reform, which includes members of Common Cause and Georgia Tea Party Patriots, is pushing for gift limits that would cap lobbyist spending on lawmakers at $100 in the hopes of curbing lobbyist influence of elected officials. The group’s reforms would also ban public officials and their family members from serving on the state ethics board or holding government contracts.

State Representative Tommy Smith says he is willing to sponsor the bill this session and is looking for other lawmakers to join him.

However, House Speaker David Ralston downplayed the need for more ethics legislation. Speaker Ralston believes the existing reporting requirements sufficiently limit lobbyist influence by keeping the public informed.

Photo of the Georgia State Capitol dome by connor.carey on Wikipedia.

NEW MEXICO: The federal district court in Albuquerque has issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of state limits on financial contributions to be used in federal campaigns and for independent expenditures in state races.

The contribution-limits law, which took effect at the conclusion of the 2010 election cycle, limits contributions to non-statewide candidates for office to $2,300 per election from any entity except a political committee, which can give $5,000 to non-statewide candidates. It limits contributions to statewide candidates for office, political action committees and political parties to $5,000 per election from individuals and groups.

The preliminary injunction is not a definitive ruling tossing any of the limits, but it is a temporary stay against the enforcement of non-statewide and independent expenditure limits based on findings that the plaintiffs were likely to be successful in their challenge to those limits, that they faced irreparable damage if the injunction wasn’t granted, and that the injunction serves the public interest.

The injunction was widely anticipated in light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United. Limits on contributions to candidates for state office and to groups intending to spend money on state races in coordination with candidates remain in place.

Representative Kevin Ryan has pre-filed a bill to end the practice of state lawmakers policing themselves in ethics matters.

The bill would abolish the legislative ethics committees and empower the Ethics Commission to enforce the law as it applies to legislators.

Currently, the Ethics Commission oversees the state’s nine constitutional officers, certain appointed state officials, and locally elected officials. However, the Ethics Commission does not have jurisdiction over legislators. Instead, lawmakers police themselves through separate House and Senate ethics committees.

State Senator Mike Rose has sponsored a proposal in the Senate that would give the legislature explicit authority to delegate ethics enforcement to an outside entity.

Lawmakers are scheduled to begin the second half of the 2011-12 legislative session on Tuesday, January 10, 2012.

The following announcement  is from the Alaska Public Offices Commission website:

The Alaska Public Offices Commission will be conducting a brief training designed to provide basic information about group campaign disclosure and to introduce filers to the new electronic filing system.

The training is scheduled for Friday, January 6, 2012 from 12:00 p.m. to 1:30 p.m. Filers may participate in person at the Anchorage office, remotely by computer, or by telephone.

Email or call Attorney Vullnet Greva at vullnet.greva@alaska.gov or (907) 276-4176 for details regarding participation.

Title 15 requires government officials and employees to disclose their financial affairs and sets minimum ethical standards for the conduct of state and local business. The law also requires all counties, municipalities, and school boards adopt ethics standards at least equal to the state’s ethics law with regard to conflicts of interest, financial disclosure, and lobbying. Each local ethics commission is required to certify its compliance with the Maryland Ethics Commission on or before October 1st of each year, beginning in 2011.

Some local officials are still working toward agreement and passage of the required bills. Although officials may follow the state’s guidelines, many are choosing their own paths. For instance, the registration thresholds for lobbyists in Title 15 include an expenditure clause and a gift clause: $500 in expenditures towards influencing legislative or executive action; or $100 in gifts for the purpose of influencing executive action. The recently passed Charles County bill has a $100 gift threshold, while Alleghany County’s gift threshold is $200. Neither bill includes an expenditure clause. However, in Howard County, there is a $100 expenditure threshold for any lobbying activity, but no gift threshold.

Conflict of interest rules have also been the subject of debate. Title 15 forbids former public officials (other than legislators) and employees from assisting or representing a party in a contract or other specific matter for compensation if the former official or employee participated significantly in the matter as an official or employee. Frederick County attempted to limit this prohibition to one year for former commissioners with an exemption for former employees. This modification was rejected by the state. The Frederick County delegation now plans to propose changes to Title 15 before the general assembly to allow the one year limitations.

Counties such as Baltimore and Montgomery continue to debate and, as of December 1, 2011, had yet to approve a final version of the required ethics bill.

In the latest development, the State Ethics Commission met to respond to exemption requests. According to the Maryland Municipal League web site:

“The Maryland State Ethics Commission met on December 8 to consider a number of exemption requests from various municipalities around the state. Several jurisdictions were requesting an extension of an existing exemption, while some cities and towns were requesting new exemptions from the recently enacted financial disclosure reporting requirement. The results were varied, although it seemed as though population and budget size were the criteria most often cited by the members of the Ethics Commission when exemptions were being considered. For more information, please contact Tom Reynolds or Candace Donoho on the MML staff.”

Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia delivered writs of election today setting February 7, 2012 as the date for special elections to fill vacancies in House District 60 and House District 107.

The election for House District 60 will occur in portions of Clayton, DeKalb and Fulton Counties.

The election for House District 107 will occur in portions of Gwinnett and Walton Counties. The runoff election, if needed, will be March 6, 2012.

The Baltimore County Council has passed a wide-ranging ethics bill after scaling back parts of the original bill proposed by County Executive Kevin Kamenetz. A series of amendments sponsored by all seven council members weakened parts of the original bill dealing with when officials can accept gifts and what defines a conflict of interest for council members.

In an effort to exceed the requirements set by a 2010 state law, Kamenetz’s original bill said public officials could not accept gifts from someone they know does business “with the county.” The council narrowed the rule to say they could not accept gifts from anyone they know does business with the “public official’s office, agency, board or commission.”

The new bill also deleted an entire section defining conflicts of interest specifically for council members in favor of a broader definition that applies to all public officials. The new bill still requires elected officials’ financial disclosure forms to be posted online starting in May 2012.

The bill, HB1080, also includes strict limits on campaign contributions and a ban on legislators working as political consultants.

Kander believes the gifts, along with six-figure campaign donations, allow special interests to gain improper influence.

The bill would limit campaign contributions to $500 for House races, $1,000 for the Senate and $2,000 for statewide elections.