May 21, 2013

Missouri House republicans working on ethics proposal

State house Republicans are working on their version of ethics legislation.

House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka) and Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City) Photos courtesy: Missouri House Communications.

House Speaker Tim Jones (R-Eureka) has been talking about ethics legislation since August. He favors a bill that passed out of the 2010 legislative session, the language of which was thrown out by the state Supreme Court earlier this year because it was attached to an unrelated bill.

“I think there was a lot of commonality and a lot of bipartisanship in that bill that passed in 2010. I believe it was largely thrown out on a couple of technicalities by the court, and that’s an opportunity to go back and look at those things.”

One of the lawmakers involved in creating a Republican ethics proposal is Representative Jay Barnes (R-Jefferson City). His priority is requiring the disclosure of donors to nonprofit organizations who make political contributions.

“If some special interest group wants to spend half-a-million dollars on politics, the very least they owe to voters is to tell the voters who they are, and I think there’s universal agreement on that.”

That proposal is also found in the Democrats’ proposal. Barnes wants to keep that provision to its own bill, separate from other ethics issues.

“I’d prefer to see the bills separated out by individual idea so that the ideas that have backing on their own can get to the finish line rather than weighting a bill down with so many different things that you lose votes with every item that you add.”

The Republicans hold a veto-proof majority in both chambers, but Barnes says that doesn’t mean that Democrat proposals won’t be considered.

“In the legislature we need to look at ideas on their own merit, not by the letter of the person’s name who sponsors the bill.”

The Democrat proposal also would bar candidates from investing campaign donations in anything other than interest-bearing checking or savings accounts. That is in response to former house speaker Steven Tilley using campaign funds to buy shares in a bank.

Barnes says he does not think the proposal is a bad idea, but he says he’s not sure there’s anything wrong with investing campaign funds such as Tilley did.

“You could think of a candidate for statewide office, for instance the Attorney General (Chris Koster) who is likely to run for governor in four years, he has money in his account right now. Should the donors who give to that candidate be locked in to their money sitting in an account interest-free without the possibility to expand upon itself through savvy investments?”

The legislative session begins January 9.

House Democrats to file ethics, campaign finance reform legislation (VIDEO)

House Democrats have announced they will file ethics and campaign finance reform legislation based on a bill that was unanimously approved by a bipartisan House committee in 2010.

Representative Kevin McManus (D-Kansas City, left) will sponsor ethics reform legislation he and Minority Leader Jake Hummel (D-St. Louis, behind podium) hope Republicans will sign on to.  (Photo credit:  Tim Bommel, Missouri House Communications)

That bill, HB 2300, did not pass. It was replaced by what Democrats say was a weaker bill that was attached to another bill and passed. The latter language was thrown out earlier this year by the state Supreme Court because it was attached to an unrelated piece of legislation, which violates state law.

Some key provisions of HB 2300 include: granting the Missouri Ethics Commission greater authority, including the power to initiate investigations, capping campaign contributions for candidates for statewide office or the General Assembly at $5,000 per donor per election, restricting committee-to-committee transfers of campaign funds, prohibiting the solicitation of campaign contributions on public property, barring lawmakers, their spouses or dependent children from accepting more than $1,000 in lobbyist expenditures per calendar year, prohibiting lawmakers from working as paid political consultants while in office and imposing a waiting period on former lawmakers lobbying the General Assembly after leaving office. Representative Kevin McManus (D-Kansas City) will file a bill that would lengthen than waiting period from one calendar year after leaving office to two years from the end of the last General Assembly in which the legislator served.

His bill will also include some new provisions related to issues that have arisen in the last two years: requiring not-for-profit organizations that contribute money for political purposes to disclose their donors, clarifying existing state law to make the intentional obscuring of the source of a campaign contribution a crime and prohibiting campaign contributions from being invested in anything other than interest-bearing checking or savings accounts.

McManus says ethics and campaign finance reform has gotten little traction in recent legislative sessions. “We’ve had a lot of talk, we’ve had a lot of excuses and we’ve had some serious obstructionism from our majority party, but in terms of results we’ve had little to none to speak of. We urge the Republican House leadership to get this bipartisan proposal heard, considered early and get campaign ethics reform done this year so we can restore some transparency and accountability to our process.”

House minority leader Jake Hummel (D-St. Louis) says he thinks the issue is bipartisan. “We are hopeful that the majority party will recognize this. I think the perception out there among the voters and among the populus is that politicians are beholden to big, corporate financial donations. I think this is a way to address it. I think that’s what (members of the public) demand.”

Hummel and McManus say if the issue isn’t addressed in the legislative session, the democrats will look to the initiative petition process to take it to a vote of the people.

Hummel says, “We will begin to partner with different groups, I think, that if this does not get done (in the legislature), to work to take it to the people because I can almost guarantee that if you put this on the ballot I’m betting it’s going to pass overwhelmingly.”

Bills can be filed beginning Monday for the session that begins January 9.

See McManus’ proposal (185 pages) here.

Watch a video of the House Democrats’ media conference below (courtesy, Jonathan Lorenz, Missouri House Communications).

Ethics Commission wants state ethics laws modernized

The state Ethics Commission is has some ideas about what a new ethics law should contain, if lawmakers look to pass one to replace what the State Supreme Court threw out in February.

Missouri State Capital

The Court rescinded that law not because of its content, but because it was passed with an unrelated measure, violating the state Constitution.

Ethics Commission Executive Director Julie Allen says Missouri law needs to be brought into the current century.

“For example, the law related to what a candidate has to put on their campaign material to show who paid for it was written quite a few years ago, so it doesn’t directly address the way a lot of campaigns are going today through internet, e-mail, Twitter and those types of things.”

Another area involves enforcement. “Are there any laws that keep someone from lying to an investigator, or obstructing ethics investigations? That’s really just holding individuals accountable, giving us the tools to enforce the law again.”

Allen says the discussion of how to update ethics laws is not just happening in Missouri. “A lot of states are looking at how do they bring their statutes up to date, because I think many states were probably, their ethics commissions were created about the same kind of timeframe so I think that’s an issue that many states are looking at now.”

She says the Commission wants to work with state legislators if and when a new ethics proposal is crafted.

Ethics Commission offers new campaign finance search tool

The Missouri Ethics Commission is offering a new tool to give Missourians a look at how money is flowing in and out of some candidates’ campaigns.

Click the image to go to the new search tool on the Ethics Commission Website.

Executive Director Julie Allen says the Candidate By Election search on the Commission’s website offers financial summaries on state and local races.

“It’s just an easy to read snapshot of the candidate’s financial information … for any upcoming elections, you can easily go to that election and see which candidates have filed with our office and all of the candidate’s financial information.”

The latest information comes from the April quarterly report. Two more reports will be issued before the August primary.

“There’s a July quarterly, which will be due on the sixteenth of July, and then for those participating in the August primary election there’s an eight day before, that actually is due July 30.”

With the various tools on the Commission’s website, Allen says voters can learn a lot.

“We also have another good search called ‘Committee Expenditures for Candidates.’ You can type in a candidate’s last name and it’s going to show you the money that is reported as spent to either support or oppose a candidate, and normally that would be coming from a PAC, a Political Action Committee.”

Allen things many Missouri voters want to know this kind of information.

“It gives good transparency for the public. If a regular citizen is interested in knowing what the difference candidates in a specific race are spending their money on or how much money they’re receiving, this gives them a quick snapshot of all the candidates.”

House Democrats and Republicans weigh in on new ethics bill

House Democrats have filed an ethics bill to replace the provisions thrown out by the state Supreme Court, and then some.

House Speaker Steven Tilley and Assistant Minority Floor Leader Tishaura Jones

The bill’s sponsor, Minority Floor Leader Tishaura Jones (D-St. Louis) says the bill is identical to one that passed with bipartisan support out of the 2010 Special Committee on Ethics Reform, which was House BIll 2300. That legislation included the same provisions that were thrown out by the Court, and more.

See the legislation, HB 1939

One additional piece is campaign contribution limits. House Speaker Steven Tilley (R-Perryville) says he would want to see those removed in Committee. “I’ve always been opposed to campaign contribution limits because it leads to what we used to have before, where people would give to committees and then committees would give to other people and it was hard to track the money. The system we’ve got now … there’s openness, there’s transparency and there’s accountability.”

Tilley says there is time for the bill to make it through the process. “If the Senate can get something through that addresses the things that I think really were good as far as from an ethics standpoint, I don’t see a problem with the House passing it.”

Jones says another provision would prohibit the investment of campaign contributions in anything other than interest-bearing checking or savings accounts. “You shouldn’t be able to make money off of it … These are campaign moneys. They should be used for campaigning, not for returns on investments and making money off of it.”

Tilley recently invested $900,000 from his campaign fund in a community bank, but Jones says that provision is not aimed at any one lawmaker. “There are other candidates who currently have moneys in CDs and money market investments, so we’re trying to make the playing field even.”

Tilley doesn’t believe that provision is directed at him. “I don’t think so, because nobody’s made any allegations that I’ve done anything inappropriately or unethically.”

He says he will treat the bill like any other, by referring it to committee and letting it make its way through the process.