Lobbying

“The Trump Lobbying Purge That Wasn’t” by Maggie Severns and Isaac Arnsdorf for Politico

Colorado: “Denver City Council Committee Stalls Vote Again on Ethics Changes” by Jon Murray for Denver Post

Massachusetts: “Could Lobbying Rules Have Saved Boston from Ill-Fated Grand Prix?” by Andrew Ryan for Boston Globe

Missouri: “House Passes HB 60 to Limit Lobbyist Gifts” by Benjamin Peters for Missouri Times

South Dakota: “Senators Reluctantly Allow Lobbyists to Stay” by Dana Ferguson for Sioux Falls Argus Leader

Campaign Finance

“SEC Settles with 10 Public Fund Money Managers Over Pay-to-Play Violations” by Hazel Bradford for Pensions & Investments

Ethics

South Carolina: “Lt. Gov. Henry McMaster Paying Off Ethics Penalties Before Becoming Governor” by Andy Shain for Charleston Post & Courier

Texas: “State Rep. Dawnna Dukes Indicted by Grand Jury” by Alex Samuels for Texas Tribune

Elections

Kansas: “Kobach Seeks Authority for Bifurcated Elections; Downplays Issue of Missing Registrations” by Peter Hancock for Lawrence Journal World

Legislative Issues

“How a Mother-in-Law Inspired a Bill to Protect Drivers” by Cleve Wootson Jr. for Washington Post

Ethics reform legislation passed the Missouri House Tuesday afternoon with wide bipartisan support.

House Bill 60 would prohibit lobbyists and lobbyist principals from making expenditures for state public officials or for their staff, spouses, or dependent children.

An exception would remain for event expenditures if all members of the Legislature or all statewide officials are invited in writing. For clarity, the bill would subsequently remove any unnecessary lobbyist reporting requirements.

The bill now moves to the Senate for consideration.

According to a memorandum from the Alabama House Bill Clerk, lobbyists and state agency representatives will be issued identification badges.

After registering with the Ethics Commission, a lobbyist or state agency representative must sign up with the Alabama House to receive the new badges.

Badges may be acquired by calling House Bill Clerk Dildred Bass at (334) 242-7616, or in-person at Bass’s office located in the Alabama State House, Office of the Clerk, Room 504-B.

The Senate Committee on Legislative Procedure decided to table consideration of a proposed new rule to ban lobbyists from the chamber and adjacent hallways during working hours.

The measure came up for a vote yesterday and the committee voted unanimously to let the lobbyists stay. Lawmakers could decide to reconsider adoption of the proposal any time during the legislative session.

Lobbying

Michigan: “From Lawmaker to Lobbyist. Should the State Slow Down the Revolving Door?” by Craig Mauger and Ted Roelofs for Bridge Magazine

Campaign Finance

California: “La Jolla Car Dealer Sentenced for Role in Funneling Illegal Contributions to San Diego Mayor’s Race” by Greg Moran for San Diego Union Tribune

Ethics

“Trump’s Cabinet Pick Invested in Company, Then Introduced a Bill to Help It” by Manu Raju for CNN

Arkansas: “North Little Rock Attorney Says No Ethics Violation in Dallas Cowboys Tickets Given to Police Officers” by Jake Sandlin for Arkansas Online

Iowa: “Kent Sorenson Sentenced to 15 Months in Prison for Role in Caucus Scandal” by Grant Rodgers for Des Moines Register

New Mexico: “Will Independent Ethics Oversight Catch On in 2017?” by Trip Jennings for New Mexico In Depth

Pennsylvania: “DA Williams Fined $62,0000 for Ethics Violations” by Claudia Vargas for Philadelphia Inquirer

Virginia: “Lengthy New Ethics Bill Targets Redskin Tickets Loophole” by Travis Fain for The Daily Press

Elections

“Rolling in the Red Carpet: Many Pennsylvania Avenue firms to ignore Trump parade” by Stephanie Mansfield for Washington Times

Five City Council members recently asked the Los Angeles Ethics Commission to address the issue of real estate developers making political contributions.

Developers can appear to be benefiting when elected officials they’ve supported grant them land-use perks such as zoning exemptions.

This campaign finance reform initiative focuses on restricting donations specifically from developers, contractors, and subcontractors whose projects are being reviewed by the city.

Corpus Christi, Texas City Council will meet Tuesday to discuss new recommendations to the ethics code to further tighten rules for City Council members. The Council unanimously approved the new code during a first vote last week.

If approved on the second vote, it will be formally adopted by City Council. If adopted, the modified code would ban council members from appointing people to city committees and boards if the appointee contributed more than $2,700 to the council member’s campaign in the previous election. This would not ban the contributor from appointment, but would require a council member who did not receive contributions meeting the threshold to appoint the person.

Additionally, the prospective code broadens who falls within what is called the circle of influence and indicates a conflict of interest if a person with a specific relationship to a council member would profit from a council member’s vote. The current circle of influence includes direct family members but could be expanded to cover employers of family members and household members if the new code is adopted.

Legislators will attempt to pass a major ethics reform for the second time after their effort during the 2015 legislative session failed. The plan gained wide spread support in 2015 but was ultimately defeated in the House due to a provision increasing donor disclosure requirements for dark money groups.

The new reform package, Senate Bill 14, has four main provisions to:

• Prohibit politicians convicted of felony corruption charges from collecting state pensions
• Require disclosure if companies a lobbyist is tied to have received government contracts or served as bond counsel to a governmental entity
• Decrease the amount of money lobbyists can spend on food and drinks for legislators without triggering disclosure
• Ban registered lobbyists from running for elected office

Sen. Van Taylor who is sponsoring Senate Bill 14 has said reform is needed beyond the provisions of the reform package and will continue to file additional ethics bills. While Senate Bill 14 has not yet been filed, Taylor has filed Senate Bill 137 aiming to prohibit state agencies from using state funds to employ a person who is registered as a lobbyist or who engages in lobbying activities.

Gov. Greg Abbott supports the passage of an ethics package.

Photo of the Texas State Capitol By LoneStarMike via Wikimedia Commons

New Mexico lawmakers have recently introduced several ethics bills.

House Bill 119 would make it unlawful for a state legislator or legislative candidate to solicit or accept a contribution, even absent any political purpose.

House Bill 73 seeks to create a two-year revolving door provision prohibiting former statewide elected officials, public regulation commissioners, legislators, and cabinet secretaries from accepting compensation as lobbyists for a period of two years after terminating their service. The bill would also prohibit a lobbyist employer from compensating any of the aforementioned persons during the two-year period.

State Sen. Daniel A. Ivey-Soto introduced Senate Bill 72, also known as the Public Accountability Act (PAA). If passed, the PAA would create the Public Accountability Board (PAB) with enforcement powers over the compliance provisions of various public acts including, but not limited to, those related to campaign finance reporting, lobbying, public accountability, ethics, and procurement.

The PAB would serve as an adjunct agency with the secretary of state, members of the board of commissioners of the state bar, the governor, and the chief justice of the supreme court each appointing three members, respectively. Among its provisions, the act amends the definition of lobbyist and prohibits lobbyists and government contractors from serving on the PAB. If passed, several of the sections would be effective as soon as July 1, 2017, while the PAB would not gain enforcement powers over many of the listed acts until July 1, 2019.

Campaign Finance

“Corporations Open the Cash Spigot for Trump’s Inauguration” by Nicholas Fandos for New York Times

New Mexico: “Leadership Shift Sparks Hope for Supporters of Campaign Finance Reform” by Sandra Fish for New Mexio In Depth

Wisconsin: “Former Wisconsin Judges Seek Rules on Campaign Donations” by Patrick Marley and Bill Glauber for Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Ethics

“Trump’s Administration Will Regulate Trump’s Businesses, Raising Prospect of Conflicts” by Rosalind Helderman, Drew Harwell, and Tom Hamburger for Washington Post

California: “Sweetwater School District Gets $8.2 Million in Settlement Over Pay-to-Play Scandal” by Greg Moran for San Diego Union Tribune

Colorado: “Colorado Ethics Commission Puts Denver, Aurora and Other Cities on Notice in Turf Battle Over Gift Rules” by Jon Murray for Denver Post

New Jersey: “Christie Selects Campaign Donor as New Ethics Watchdog” by Salvador Rizzo for Bergen Record

Canada: “Ethics Watchdog Opens Probe into Trudeau’s Vacation at the Aga Khan’s Island” by Alex Ballingall for Toronto Star

Elections

“‘Kompromat’ and the Danger of Doubt and Confusion in a Democracy” by Amanda Taub for New York Times

A proposed amendment to the Florida Constitution seeks to slow the revolving door between public officials and lobbyists.

Currently, members of the legislature, statewide officials, and appointed officials must wait two years before lobbying on behalf of a principal.

The amendment, PCB 17-01, would extend the cooling-off period to six years. The change, proponents say, would prevent officials from ingratiating themselves to lobbyists in hopes of landing a high paying position after leaving office.

The amendment is being considered by the House Public Integrity and Ethics Committee and will be voted on at the Committee’s next meeting.

Lawmakers in Washington have introduced two bills to enhance campaign finance disclosure and ethics laws.

Senate Bill 5108 aims to increase transparency of “gray money” by limiting political action committees from receiving 70 percent or more of their contributions from other political committees.

Another proposal, House Bill 1159, seeks to establish revolving door provisions requiring former state officials to take a yearlong “cooling-off” period before they can become lobbyists.

The Senate Committee on Legislative Procedure is considering a new rule to ban lobbyists from the chamber and adjacent hallways during working hours.

The committee is expected to reconvene tomorrow for a vote on the proposal. If adopted, Senate President Pro Tempore, Brock Greenfield, would have the authority to implement the new measure.

The Colorado Independent Ethics Commission recently issued a position statement notifying home-rule municipalities of its intent to consider ethics complaints against local officials and employees if their local ethics codes are less restrictive than state law.

Constitutional Amendment 41, passed by voters in 2006, sets a $59 (adjusted for inflation) gift limit for public officers, legislators, local government officials and government employees as well as for their spouses and dependent children. More than 70 municipalities, however, are designated as home-rule and, therefore, can adopt local ethics rules in lieu of state law. In addition to the opt-out provision, there is also a provision allowing other local governments to adopt stricter ethics rules.

According to the commission, the constitutional provision permitting local governments to enact more stringent rules still applies to those home-rule municipalities choosing to opt out of the state law provisions.

Critics of the position statement, including Colorado Ethics Watch and Colorado Common Cause, believe the commission is misinterpreting Amendment 41; local governments with home-rule powers should be permitted to opt out if they adopt local laws covering the same ground. They dispute any interpretation wherein Amendment 41 simultaneously applies to and does not apply to home-rule municipalities with adopted ethics rules.

City attorneys throughout the state are currently taking no action while the Colorado Municipal League looks at potential legal options.