Several citizen’s initiatives were approved by Maine voters last night. Ranked-choice voting will replace the current election system (IB 2); a tax surcharge will be imposed on certain households to increase funding for public schools (IB 3); minimum wage will be raised to $12 an hour by 2020.  Maine will be the first state to institute ranked-choice voting.

The new system ensures the winning candidate in a multicandidate race receives the majority vote because voters rank candidates in order of preference.

If a candidate does not receive 50 percent of first-choice votes, then the lowest scoring candidate is eliminated and votes are retabulated.

On November 8, voters in California rejected a proposition requiring the state not pay for any prescription drug from a drug manufacturer at any price over the lowest price paid for the same drug by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). With over 96.6 percent of the precincts reporting, 53.7 percent voted against the proposition and 46.3 percent voted for it, according to the California Secretary of State’s office.

Proposition 61, which would have created The California Drug Price Relief Act, applied to any program where the state agency is the ultimate payer for a prescription drug, even if the state agency does not itself buy the drug. The proposition exempted purchases of prescription drugs under managed care programs funded through Medi-Cal, which offers comprehensive health coverage to the state’s low-income residents. The managed care program serves approximately 75 percent of Medi-Cal enrollees. The proposition only applied to the fee-for-service system of Medi-Cal covering the remaining 25 percent of enrollees.

Opponents of the proposition argued drug manufacturers could decline to offer the state certain drugs sold to the VA or increase drug prices for the VA to reduce any decrease to profits.

Missouri voters approved Constitutional Amendment 2 with nearly 70 percent of voter support. The ballot measure is effective December 8, 2016.

The amendment establishes the Missouri Campaign Contribution Reform Initiative, reinstating campaign contribution limits for individuals or entities contributing to political parties, political committees, or committees to elect candidates for state or judicial office. The initiative also prohibits individuals and entities from intentionally concealing the source of such contributions, and bans direct corporation and labor union contributions to candidates.

State contribution limits, originally approved by voters in 1994, were repealed by the General Assembly in 2008. Constitutional Amendment 2 limits contributions to statewide candidates to $2,600 per election. Contributions to political parties are capped at $25,000 in the aggregate per election at the state, county, municipal, district, ward, and township levels combined.

Citizens of South Dakota voted in favor of lobbying and campaign finance reform. Initiated Measure 22 (IM 22), known as the South Dakota Government Accountability and Anti-Corruption Act, passed by a tally of 52% to 48%.

IM 22 creates a publicly funded campaign finance system and lowers contribution limits as well as new gift limits and revolving door restrictions for former state officials.

Though approved by the voters, the measure may face constitutional challenges in court.

On November 8, California voters approved a proposition directing state elected officials overturn Citizens United.

Overturn of Citizens United Act Advisory Question (Proposition 59) asked voters to affirm state elected officials should use all constitutional authority, including, but not limited to, proposing and ratifying one or more amendments to the U.S. Constitution to overturn Citizens United and other applicable judicial precedents to allow the full regulation or limitation of campaign spending. The proposition also directs the officials to act to make clear corporations should not have the same constitutional rights as human beings.

As of 5:00 a.m., with over 90 percent of the precincts reporting, the proposition passed 52.4 percent to 47.6 percent, according to the California Secretary of State’s office.

The Chicago Board of Ethics recently submitted two amendments to City Council, potentially affecting lobbyist filing procedures.

One amendment would require lobbyists to file all documents electronically in the Electronic Lobbyist Filing (ELF) system. The other amendment would establish enforcement provisions related to the electronic filing requirement.

Unless a majority of aldermen vote to disapprove them, the amendments will become effective on December 11, 2016. Once effective, the Board of Ethics will implement the new procedures beginning January 1, 2017. Paper filings will no longer be accepted after December 31, 2016.

A federal judge has upheld the constitutionality of Montana’s campaign finance disclosure law.

The 2015 Disclose Act, aimed at combating an increase in dark money spending, faced a constitutional challenge asserting the law interfered with the free speech of groups wanting to influence elections without revealing the source of their money or how it is spent. The law requires political committees in Montana to report spending and donors within 60 days of an election if the committee’s advertisements mention a political candidate.

In his opinion, Judge Dana Christensen, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, cited to the ruling in Citizens United. He referenced the notion that while disclosure requirements may burden the ability to speak, they do not prevent anyone from speaking.

There are still two legal challenges to the Disclose Act pending, one at the state level and one in federal court.

The New York City Council plans to hear legislation aimed at limiting contributions from contributors who have city business to groups directed or affiliated with an elected official.

The bill, yet to be released publicly, will likely limit contributions to hundreds of dollars and require city or public officials to report contributors annually.

The bill will likely be introduced to City Council within two weeks.

Gov. Pat McCrory announced that he expects to call a special session in early December to address Hurricane Matthew relief.

The governor said he will turn in the state’s request for federal disaster assistance on Nov. 14.

Once federal relief is approved by Congress, the state will need to provide matching funds and funding for what federal relief won’t cover.

Photo of Gov. Pat McCrory by Hal Goodtree on Wikimedia Commons.

On November 9, a public hearing will be held regarding proposed regulations for the new Rhode Island Lobbying Reform Act. The hearing will take place from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. in the State House, Room 313.

Additionally, a public comment period is open until November 27.

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 new act. Among the changes 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 Rhode Island Lobbying Reform Act takes effect on January 1, 2017. If passed, the new regulations will take effect on January 2, 2017.

Photo of the Rode Island State Capitol by Garrett A. Wollman on Wikimedia Commons.

Texas State House District 118 Rep. Dawnna Dukes announced she will resign January 10, 2017, citing health issues stemming from a 2013 car accident.

Dukes is running for a 12th term and will remain on the November ballot. If she is successful in the general election, the seat will remain vacant until a special election is called next year. Her Republican opponent is calling for an immediate resignation to eliminate the possibility of the district’s residents remaining unrepresented for months.

The resignation comes amidst allegations and an investigation regarding her alleged use of state resources for non-governmental purposes. The current allegations are the most recent in a string of ethics and campaign finance controversies throughout her 22-year career.

Photo of Rep. Dawnna Dukes courtesy of the Texas House of Representatives website.

St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay recently signed Board Bill No. 53CSAA, establishing contribution limits for municipal candidates.

Effective November 25, 2016, no person, entity, or committee may contribute more than $10,000 to any local candidate during the general election period. The bill also establishes an ethics commission to investigate alleged campaign finance violations.

Any person violating campaign finance law will be subject to a fine of at least $100 but not more than $500 per violation, a term of imprisonment for 90 days per violation, or both.

Photo of Mayor Francis Slay by Astuishin on Wikimedia Commons.

A bill introduced in 2015 is finally advancing to the full City Council.

If passed, Bill 15-0568 would require Baltimore’s Finance Department to post on its website a searchable list of all entities doing business with the city by February 1 of each year. Similarly, the bill would require the Ethics Board to post on its website a searchable list of all lobbyists by February 1 of each year.

The bill will likely be voted on by City Council on November 14, 2016.

The Office of the City Clerk released an advisory opinion to clarify language in the city administrative code.

Pursuant to Administrative Code §3-211(c), “lobbying” or “lobbying activities” include any attempt to influence any determination made by an employee of the city with respect to the terms of the acquisition or disposition by the city of any interest in real property, with respect to a license or permit for the use of real property of or by the city, or with respect to a franchise, concession or revocable consent.

Due to the above language, builders were concerned obtaining a building permit would be considered lobbying activity. In Advisory Opinion 2016-1, the city clerk concluded an application to the Department of Buildings (DOB) for work permits and any ensuing communications with employees of the DOB are not lobbying or a lobbying activity under the Administrative Code.

Photo of New York City by AngMoKio on Wikimedia Commons.