Governor Andrew Cuomo has made a bold move; a move he hopes will slow down the corruption emanating from New York City. Governor Cuomo has decided not to call a special election to replace Assemblyman Nelson Castro’s seat representing the Bronx. Instead, the election to replace Castro will take place during the regularly scheduled city elections this November.

Castro resigned from his state Assembly seat as part of a deal made with prosecutors investigating public corruption in the Bronx.

Cuomo decided against the special election as way to quell the corruption taking place the city. Had Cuomo scheduled a special election, the Democrats would have had free reign to choose the successor, because the Bronx Democratic leader, Carl Hestie, would have been the one picking the candidate for his party. In the open primary, scheduled for September 10, outsiders have a much better chance at securing the Democratic nod.

Cuomo said, “Having the election during the already scheduled New York City elections, instead of calling a special election, will ensure maximum participation from the constituents of the 86th Assembly District and be the most cost-effective for taxpayers.”

Photo of Governor Cuomo courtesy of Pat Arnow on Wikipedia.

Voters in the District of Columbia participated in a special election Tuesday and chose a familiar face. Anita Bonds held off five challengers to win the council seat she currently occupies. Bonds was chosen to temporarily hold the at-large seat after Phil Mendelson became the council chairman.

Bonds declared victory shortly after midnight and according to unofficial results collected 32 percent of the vote. Her closest competitor, Elissa Silverman garnered 28 percent of the vote.

Turnout was very low for the special election, which was the district’s second special election in the past three years. One voter said, “I didn’t know any of them. But I’m a Democrat. So I voted for – who was it? – Anita (Bonds).”

The voters also passed a ballot measure seeking to give the district autonomy over spending its tax dollars. The measure, which passed with more than 80 percent approval, would allow the district to spend its tax dollars without congressional approval.

The measure will become law unless the United States Congress passes a disapproval resolution and that resolution is also signed by President Obama. The measure is the latest in the long struggle for district citizens to break free from the leash of the federal government.

One voter said, “We can take care of ourselves.”

Photo of the John A. Wilson Building by Awiseman on Wikipedia.

The Tennessee General Assembly adjourned for the year on Friday night after completing its shortest session in more than three decades. The General Assembly only met for 37 days this session, but that 37th day was one filled with controversy and a possible scandal.

The General Assembly did not bring a charter schools bill to vote, which was a favorite of the house speaker and the governor. Many members are already looking at next session for the charter schools bill.

Governor Bill Haslam said, “I certainly don’t think it’s dead. We plan to come back with that same bill next year.”

Speaking of the governor, his family has been in the state and national headlines recently. Haslam is a part owner of Pilot Flying J with his brother Jimmy Haslam, who is the new owner of the Cleveland Browns. The company’s headquarters was raided by the FBI last week in an investigation into whether the company engaged in a scam to defraud truckers and trucking companies.

Governor Haslam has not been implicated in the scheme, but it is sure to stay in the headlines while the FBI’s investigation continues.

The Tennessee House of Representatives struck down a bill removing the prohibition on contributions from insurance companies and raising the contribution limits for party caucuses. House Bill 643 came up just two votes shy, collecting only 48 of the needed 50 votes to pass. The bill did however receive a majority of the votes, 48-41, so the bill is not technically dead.

Currently, Tennessee law prohibits insurance companies from making a contribution for political purposes. Under the bill, insurance companies would have had the ability to make contributions and would have had the same contribution limits as multicandidate political campaign committees.

The bill also would have allowed party caucuses to contribute $500,000 for statewide races, instead of the current limit of $374,300. It also would have doubled the amount the caucuses could contribute to senate and house candidates.

The bill was not defeated on a strict party line vote, as 13 Republicans voted against and another nine Republicans did not cast votes on the bill. It remains to be seen whether the House will bring the bill up for a second vote.

Photo of the Tennessee State Capitol House Chamber by Ichabod on Wikipedia.

The contributions limits in the upcoming Pittsburgh mayoral election have been removed by the courts. Judge Joseph James voided the city’s contribution limits because of one candidate’s decision to contribute his own money to his campaign.

Under city law, candidates may only accept $2,000 from individuals and $4,000 from PACs per covered election. However, if a candidate decides to use personal resources in excess of $50,000 for his or her campaign, then the contribution limitations are thrown out for all candidates in that specific race.

In this situation, Councilman Bill Peduto requested an injunction barring former state Auditor General Jack Wagner from using nearly $300,000 in contributions collected during previous campaigns. The judge ruled the use of the previous campaign funds to be a contribution, which would have exceeded the city’s contribution limits.

Wagner’s lawyers then turned their attention to Michael Lamb, the city controller who withdrew from the race earlier in the week. Lamb had given his campaign $53,000 of his own money, which voided the contribution limits and allowed Wagner to use the $300,000 in question. Lamb attempted to give $3,000 from the campaign back to himself in order to undo the contribution, but the judge ruled that the refund did not repair the breach.

The primary election for the mayoral office takes place on May 21, 2013 and the general election on November 5, 2013.

Photo of downtown Pittsburgh by Theeditor93 on Wikipedia.

A state appellate court has ruled that a trial court judge must reconsider the state’s large fine for lobbying law violations. Don Beason, once considered one of the state’s most influential lobbyists, was originally fined $111,000 for a violation of the state’s disclosure policy for lobbyists. This fine was eventually reduced to $30,000 after the court ruled it was too large. Beason was working on overturning the state’s “Buy America” law for Sigma Corporation, a New Jersey company who imports foreign-made iron and steel.

The state claims Beason was paid with money funneled from an Indian iron exporters’ trade association and other companies through Sigma and Beason knew of this arrangement and failed to disclose. The trial court ruled that state law defines a lobbyist as someone who communicates directly with legislators or their employees and there was no evidence Beason directly contacted anyone for these clients supposedly funneling money through Sigma.

The appellate court however found the trial court failed to consider a second aspect of Beason’s case; whether Beason’s activities for the client constituted lobbying. The trial court must rule on that issue and then can determine whether the state has the power to fine Beason.

There is no time frame on when the trial court will hear the second part of this case.

It has been a long cold winter for most of the country and though it may be hard to see, sunshine and warm weather are fast approaching. While cold temperatures and snow are making summer seem far in the distance, Major League Baseball’s opening week is upon us and that means summer is close. With America’s pastime finally here, the Sunlight Foundation did a report on how much Major League Baseball and its clubs contributed to campaigns and PACs throughout the last election cycle.

According to the report, MLB organizations contributed more than $24 million last election cycle. The Chicago Cubs can’t win on the field (they have not been to a World Series since 1945 and have not won since 1908), but they certainly won the political spending war. The Cubs spent $13.9 million, more than $12 million more than any other team. Most of that money, more than $12 million, went to a PAC started by the Ricketts family (the team’s ownership group) established to fight wasteful spending in Washington and the defeat of President Obama. However, not all of the family veered to the right with their spending. Laura Ricketts spend more than $500,000 on Democratic candidates and PACs.

The Cubs rival, and President Obama’s favorite team, the Chicago White Sox were one of the few teams who favored the Democrats in their spending. The White Sox gave several donations to Obama, amounting to $60,000 and only $7,000 to Obama’s opponent in the presidential election, Mitt Romney.

Not all teams spend heavily though. The Toronto Blue Jays did not contribute a single penny, as federal laws do not allow foreign contributions to campaigns. The Oakland Athletics only gave a $5,000 contribution to the league’s PAC and gave nothing to either the Republican or Democratic parties. The New York Yankees, owners of the league’s highest payroll at nearly $229 million, only spent $43,000 off the field in political donations.

In addition to the individual teams contributing, Major League Baseball operates its own PAC, called the MLB Commissioner’s Office PAC. The league collects donations from each team and contributes fairly evenly to both the Democrats and Republicans. The Los Angeles Dodgers were the only team to eschew a donation to the league’s PAC.

Most of the donations coming from baseball were made by team executives and owners. However, a few current and former players decided to contribute. Players to contribute to the Republicans included White Sox second baseman Gordon Beckham, New York Yankees designated hitter Travis Hafner, and San Diego Padres closer Huston Street. Los Angeles Dodgers outfield Tony Gwynn Jr. was the only current player to contribute to the Democrats, but he was joined by Hall of Famers Hank Aaron and Lou Brock.

For a complete look at how each team contributed, check out the Sunlight Foundation’s report. And just remember, no matter how miserable the weather may be today, baseball is here and summer is right around the corner.

As a result of the state of Maine’s observance of Patriot’s Day, the March lobbying report is now due on April 16, 2013. Normally, the monthly lobbying report is due on the 15th day of each month, but with the state holiday, the Ethics Commission has pushed back the due date.

All registered lobbyists must file a report, even if no lobbying was done during the month. If a lobbyist did not lobby during the month of March, he or she may file a short-form report.

Patriot’s Day is only a state holiday in Maine and Massachusetts (in Massachusetts it is officially Patriots’ Day) and celebrates the anniversary of the Battles of Lexington and Concord, the first battles of the Revolutionary War. In Boston, the holiday is celebrated by the running of the annual Boston Marathon and a late morning Boston Red Sox game.

Photo of the Lexington Minuteman statue by Daderot on Wikipedia.

New York City mayoral candidate George McDonald has momentarily thrown up the white flag in his attempt to circumvent the contribution limits. McDonald, who is running for the Republican nomination, filed suit against the New York City Campaign Finance Board in hope of removing the city’s very strict contribution limits.

McDonald’s argument relied on the theory that the state’s contribution limits, which are higher than the city’s limits, superseded the city’s restrictions. McDonald had hoped for a quick resolution, but the court has taken nearly a month to decide the case and McDonald fears he is running low on time.

McDonald now plans on raising enough funds to qualify for the public financing system, meaning he will have to raise at least $250,000 from donations of up to $175. If he is able to do that, the city will give his campaign $1.5 million.

McDonald is considered a long shot to win the Republican nod as he is going up against a political veteran, Joseph Lhota, and a billionaire businessman, John A. Catsimatidis. McDonald has argued that the city’s laws give these two types of candidates an unfair advantage over first-time candidates.

McDonald’s lawsuit still must be decided by the court, but most experts believe he has little chance of winning.

Image of the flag of New York courtesy of Wikipedia.

The New York City Council has overridden Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of a campaign finance bill loosening the disclosure requirements. The law, which will go into effect immediately, was fiercely opposed by both Bloomberg and New York City Campaign Finance Board Director Amy Loprest, but the City Council has nearly unanimously supported it from the outset.

The law will allow labor or other membership organizations, as well as corporations, to send campaign communications to its members, executive and administrative personnel, and stockholders without having to disclose that information to the Campaign Finance Board. According to Loprest, $35,000 in outside spending on mass mailers was spent in the two special elections since the city adopted its stringent rules.

In a statement Loprest said, “Disclosure helps voters understand who is speaking and trying to influence the outcome of their election. Just as important, disclosure helps voters hold candidates accountable for their supporters during an election and for the policies they pursue. New Yorkers want and deserve access to complete information about the interests supporting candidates for city office. The legislation approved by the Council today will hide some of that information from public view.”

Councilwoman Gale Brewer disagreed with this notion, saying “Member-to-member communications are not intended to influence the public. So, the public’s interest in source disclosure is significantly reduced.”

With city elections upcoming in November, both sides will see how these new rules actually affect the elections and spending.

Photo of the New York City Hall by Howrealisreal on Wikipedia.

The Pennsylvania House of Representatives has introduced a bill with ramifications on the way lobbyists do business in the commonwealth. Currently, lobbyists may give gifts to anyone, provided there is no understanding the recipient will take an official action as a result of the gift. House Bill 855, however, would do away with this practice and limit the ability of lobbyists to give gifts.

The bill, introduced by representatives from both sides of the aisle, would prohibit public officers and candidates from receiving gifts from lobbyists and principals exceeding $50 in a calendar year. The bill would also limit the hospitality received by public officers and candidates from lobbyists and principals to $500 in a calendar year.

Gifts to public officials has become a hot topic in the commonwealth after reports surfaced saying Governor Tom Corbett has accepted gifts in the past.

When asked whether the governor would support a gift ban, spokeswoman Kelli Roberts said, “Governor Corbett has a tremendous record of transparency and enacting state government reforms, therefore, of course, he would be open to discussing any measures that help to further those goals.”

Bills of this nature usually have a tough time gaining legislative approval, but with the current climate in the commonwealth, House Bill 855 may have a better chance to survive than most.

Seal of the State of Pennsylvania art by Henrik on Wikipedia.

State Representative Scott Drury has recently introduced two bills that would change the way lobbyists operate within the state. House Bill 2957 would change the definition of lobbying, thus causing more people to register as a lobbyist.

The bill would add communicating with a local government to influence action to the definition of lobbying. Therefore, all people who lobby a local government without a lobbying ordinance, the cities of Rockford and Springfield for example, would have to register as a lobbyist with the state. Also, those who lobby in a city with a lobbying ordinance, such as Chicago, would have to register with the state, in addition to their current city registration.

House Bill 2964 is a bill aimed at the state’s current prohibition on gifts. It would prohibit the relatives of a state officer, legislator, or employee from receiving prohibited gifts from a prohibited source (under state law, a lobbyist is considered a prohibited source). The bill also adds a new exception to the ban, adjusts one of the current exceptions, and abolishes another of the exceptions.

If the bill passes, a state officer, legislator, or employee would be allowed to accept admission to and the cost of food and beverages consumed at a reception, meal, or meeting by an organization before whom the recipient appears to speak or answer questions as part of a scheduled program where all members of the General Assembly were invited. This would replace the current exception for food and beverage, which allows for those to be provided if catered or consumed on the premises.

The bill would also limit the amount of travel expenses provided to $111 per day and the travel must be on a carrier available to the general public.

It remains to be seen whether either one of the bills will pass, but should they pass in their current form, it will change how lobbyists do business in the state.

Photo of the Illinois State Capitol by Daniel Schwen on Wikipedia.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg vetoed a campaign finance bill aimed at decreasing campaign finance disclosure, even though City Council overwhelmingly passed the bill by a 47-1 margin in January. The bill would have allowed labor or other membership organizations, as well as corporations, to send communications to its members, executive and administrative personnel, and stockholders without having to disclose that information to the Campaign Finance Board.

Bloomberg was noncommittal at the time about whether he would veto the bill, even though he was adamantly opposed to its passage. However, now with his decision to veto it, the ball will bounce back into the City Council’s court.

The council has 30 days to override the veto, with a two-thirds majority required, or allow the bill to die. The council had enough votes to override the veto originally, but there has been no word on whether every council member will stick with his or her original vote.

Photo of Mayor Michael Bloomberg by Rubenstein on Wikipedia.

State lawmakers introduced a bill aimed at keeping former legislators out of the lobbying ranks following the end of their terms. Senate Bill 33 would prohibit legislators from lobbying for two years following the end of their public service.

Representative Dana Wachs, a co-sponsor of the bill, said, “If we don’t start doing something about these issues, I think our republic is somewhat in danger. We’re supposed to represent people, not corporations.”

The state does not currently have a prohibition against lobbying after public service, but it does prevent state public officials from appearing, on behalf of someone else for compensation, before a governmental entity under the former official’s responsibility for one year following employment.

Photo of the Wisconsin Capitol Building by Dori on Wikipedia.