http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/future-of-ethics-reforms-unclear-after-missouri-senate-lobbying-vote/article_0bc260df-d74d-5f4f-ac89-0e35287f944d.html
After showing a united Republican front for two months, House Speaker Todd Richardson and Senate President Pro Tem Ron Richard watched the Senate on Thursday gut a House proposal designed to erect a firewall between the Legislature and the more than 900 lobbyists who patrol the Capitol corridors.
Rather than signing off on a House-led plan to enact a one-year cooling off period before lawmakers can become lobbyists, the Senate rejected the waiting period, instead only requiring legislators to wait until the end of their terms to jump into the potentially lucrative private sector.
Missouri, which features a term-limit clause, has found itself vulnerable to representatives and senators who find themselves term limited but looking for their next place of employment. For individuals who are not in a position to run for higher office, the solution has been a transition to become paid lobbyists. This revolving door policy was something that Missouri House Republicans and Democrats wanted changed. Senate members, however, cannot seem to find a way to stop the carousel.
The power ALEC and outside advocacy groups have over the Missouri state house make it a toxic environment for bills that promote transparency; especially, in a system that has come to use lobbyists in ways that were never imagined, as recently as 2012.
In a senate hearing regarding lobby efforts, Progress Missouri managed to get to the root of the problem. At the 1 minute mark, Senator Ed Emery (R-District 31, Barton), begins by noting that ethics reform in his mind may just be a matter of letting the public off of the hook, and allowing the press to shape the story:
This basically says that the public is probably not going to do their research, probably not going to know enough to not-elect or re-elect someone they don't think they can trust, and we are going to do that for them. We're going to decide if that person can take a job or not.
His implication is clear: it is the responsibility of the voting public to do their research and prevent this, and if they fail to do so, that is simply not the fault of the legislature. He continues by noting the role of the press in the decision, and how opposition to ethics reform looks in the media.
Near the 8 minute mark, the senator continues, referring to lobbyist as a requirement saying: "I look as lobbyists as unpaid staff.” This is a dangerous setup for Missouri but not surprising. Lobbyists are, in fact, paid staff. They are just not paid by the state; interest groups pay them. While there are numerous progressive and liberal lobbying groups, it is doubtful that Senator Emery would ever view them as “unpaid staff.”
It is that divide, within the state house, that leaves the fate of ethics in Missouri up in the air. With lobbyist having nearly unfettered access and a bottomless pit of fundraising available, the Wild, Wild West in Missouri has managed to create a situation where James West and Artemus Gordon have been replaced with lobbyist at the state house door, and President Grant is not the one calling the shots — often it is another legislative resource, ALEC, who sets the agenda.
For Ed Emery, the senator in question, his role in the decision to short circuit ethics discussions within the state house should come as no surprise for Missourians hoping for reform. On February 1, 2016, he hosted an event aimed at bringing more ALEC-based legislation into Jefferson City; an affair promoted and attended by prominent state house PACs and lobbyist groups.
http://view.s6.exacttarget.com/?j=fe8716767c670c7571&m=fe9112717c66077970&ls=fe3012747464057f751c79&l=ff001573716700&s=fe5c12717d6104747015&jb=ffcf14&ju=fe6b11727165017c7415&r=0
Senator Ed Emery and Representative Donna Lichtenegger Invite You to an American Legislative Exchange Council Meet and Greet with CEO Lisa B. Nelson February 1, 2016 4:30 PM - 6:00 PM
Capitol Plaza Hotel Carnegie Room Before joining ALEC, Lisa B. Nelson served as the Head of Government Relations, Americas for Visa, Inc.; Senior Vice President for External Relations, AOL Time Warner; Public Affairs Liaison to House Speaker Newt Gingrich; and as Executive Director of GOPAC.
While Senator Emery may believe that it is up to the public to be well informed of all events surrounding the legislature, too many Missourians simply do not have access to the information they need to make an informed decision. Who has that information? Well, you can assume those who attended an ALEC event packed with lobbyist might know a little bit more about the standing of legislators.
Donna Lichtenegger, District 146 Missouri
In video and pictures taken during the event, Rep. Glen Kolmeyer (R-District 53, Kansas City) begins to ask the group present about his new role within ALEC. The key question: can I pay for my membership with campaign resources?
This question, made in a room full of lobbyists, ALEC advocates and ALEC booze, represents the problem that faces the Missouri statehouse. The lines have become so blurred that Missouri legislators have a difficult time deciding what is, and is not, ethical.
This is a question that would have seemed unthinkable a few decades ago, when Doug Harpool, a St. Louis County Democrat promised that Missouri worked to build an ethics commission that will “make sure our state house stays clean.” Harpool, now a federal judge appointed by the Obama administration, noted in 2009 that his work had not gone far enough.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/missouri-ethics-bill-push-gets-tailwind-ex-lawmakers-recall-grind/article_d80f5f89-02dc-5172-982c-2379a13895e0.html
The devil is in the details, said Harpool. The Ethics Commission, for instance, is just a shell of what it would have been in his original bill. And lawmakers were already figuring ways around lobbyist gift reporting requirements by the time the next legislative session rolled around. The price, it seems, of passing ethics legislation, is making the sort of deals that limit the bill's ultimate effect.
"That bill has accomplished only a fraction of what we wanted to accomplish," Harpool said.
Still, his early accomplishment could have never foreseen the state of the Missouri state house in 2016. While federal politicians grouse about the problems created by Citizens United, in Missouri, the current system provides absolutely no ethical boundaries on state spending. For Kurt Schaefer (R-Columbia) it has worked to his advantage, allowing a single donor to make a $250,000 gift to his campaign. For Catherine Hanaway, a Republican seeking the governors office, the donation was more extreme, over $800,000 from a single donor — Rex Sinquefield.
Many had hoped that this would be the year that Missouri would come to grips with the crisis around campaign and state house ethics. With two lawmakers leaving the state house last year involved in a sex scandal in Jefferson City, and another leaving this year due to “cloudy issues”, outside observers thought this was the year to take the issue seriously.
Senator David Pierce, (R-District 21) told hometown visitors that he would continue to work for “real change” because he believed it is what the state house needed. Now, the question is how much progress can actually be made in the state house? Republicans, such as Senator Bob Onder (R-Lake St. Louis) told press in the state house that work still needed to be done, telling members present “this just doesn’t look good”, to the public when people move from the state house into lobbying.
Missouri’s ethics problem, however, goes far beyond the path from legislator to lobbyist. With unlimited giving and confusion in the state house as to the role of lobbyist in their legislative activities, it is difficult for Missouri residents to have a high degree of confidence in their legislators actually doing the will of the people.
For too many Missourians, when legislators are unsure if they can spend campaign funds on memberships with advocacy groups, and when single donors can fully fund a campaign, it is difficult to believe that the average voter has the pull to have their issues heard.
For Lezley McSpadden, mother of Michael Brown, that feeling was definitely clear. After testifying in support of body cameras, she wondered aloud if her voice would rise above the fray. Outside of the hearing, along with Senator Jamilah Nasheed (D-District 13 St. Louis County) she made the point very clear: “I hope they heard me today.”
With a runaway ethics law in Missouri and no reform package that will pass in sight, her statement could be a question. For Missourians, who are not members of ALEC or with a powerful donor, it will grow more and more difficult to believe that the answer to that question for them will be a yes.
Kansas & Missouri Kossacks
Contact the Daily Kos group Kansas & Missouri Kossacks by kosmail (members of Daily Kos only).
Contact Chris Reeves with news, tips, and/or information by email. tmservo433@gmail.com
Follow Chris on Twitter @tmservo433.
If you would like to publish or republish a Daily Kos diary to the group Kansas & Missouri Kossacks, please let us know by kosmail or email.
If you have a location or story that needs support from Connect! Unite! Act!, please let us know by kosmail or email.
Comments are closed on this story.