HomeEssential Ethics / July 26, 2019

Essential Ethics

July 26, 2019

Latest Developments:

  • The Chicago City Council unanimously approved the new Mayor’s ethics reform proposal this week. While much of the ordinance is aimed at bolstering the powers of the Inspector General and tightening rules for city officers and employees, the Chicago Board of Ethics Fact Sheet notes that the measure increases fines for most violations of the city ethics ordinance and shrinks the exemption from lobbyist registration for individuals who lobby on behalf of nonprofit organizations.  The changes to the lobby provisions take effect on January 1, 2020.
  • The Connecticut Office of State Ethics announced a new Executive Director, who succeeds the retiring Carol Carson. Peter Lewandowski, an associate general counsel at the agency, takes over on August 1, according to the Hartford Current.
  • The United States Department of Justice announced that a former congressional candidate has pleaded guilty to operating fraudulent and unregistered PACs, including a PAC called “Keeping America in Republican Control.” Between 2016 and 2018, the former candidate collected over $1.6 million in contributions for PACs that were never registered and spent over a million dollars on purely personal expenses from those contributions.  In addition, he “used the name of a former Ambassador and high-level military officer without the knowledge or permission of the person, even after being instructed not to do so.”
  • The New York Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE) met this week and, among other things on the agenda, announced that – due to technical difficulties with its Lobby Application program – the July 15, 2019 deadline to file bi-monthly reports was extended to July 30, to match the previous extension announced for semi-annual Lobbyist Employer reports.

Reminder:  

  • The Practising Law Institute presents the annual Corporate Political Activities Conference on September 6-7, 2019 in Washington, D.C.  The program comprehensively covers campaign finance, lobby disclosure and government ethics on the federal state and local level, with a break-out session on foreign political activities.  A one-day version of the program will be presented later in San Francisco, CA on October 3. A one-hour briefing on the basics of federal campaign finance law will be presented beforehand on August 1. Nielsen Merksamer co-chairs these programs.  To sign up, use the following links: One Hour Briefing on August 1 (Online, included in registration below); PLI Two-Day Conference in Washington D.C.; PLI One-Day Program in San Francisco (also webcast)

In Case You Missed It:

  • Ready for Coordination: The Center for Responsive Politics reports that Republican commissioners on the Federal Election Commission have effectively let the Hillary Clinton campaign “off the hook for campaign coordination” with a super PAC.  The Commission dismissed a complaint on a party-line vote in which Democrats would have sustained the complaint that the Clinton campaign coordinated with a well-funded super PAC that collected unlimited contributions. The 2-2 tie vote meant that the complaint could not go forward.
  • Handwringing over Lobbyists’ ContributionsThe San Jose Mercury News reports that Democratic presidential candidates are divided over whether to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists and, specifically, from individuals registered to lobby for foreign governments.  Leading candidates have eschewed donations from all registered federal lobbyists; other candidates who are “more strapped for funds” have accepted donations from individuals registered to lobby for foreign governments.  The matter arises at a time when candidates are “worried about foreign influence in the U.S. political system.”  Meanwhile, Politico reports that while many Democratic presidential candidates have refused and returned contributions from registered federal lobbyists, that hasn’t stopped them from accepting contributions from government relations professionals whose lobbying activity is just short of the threshold for registration.
  • Better than Googling: A Chicago website created by journalists lets citizens type in their address or ward number to see if their alderman has been indicted.  The site, com, with a tag line, “Because at this point you’ve gotta ask,” seeks to increase transparency in Chicago government.  According to Block Club Chicago, the Website “includes information on the aldermen who lead all 50 of Chicago’s wards, as well as the history of political corruption in each ward.” The article by Block Club quotes one of the founder’s comments about the statistics of indictment and conviction who says, “Chicago aldermen are batting about .300 when it comes to criminality.”
  • Toothless Ethics Commission: The Austin American-Statesman describes the Austin Ethics Review Commission’s powers as “relatively toothless” compared to other cities’ commissions.  The article points out that the commission can’t impose fines and is limited to sending “a mean letter or a meaner letter.”  “If it finds a violation, it can issue one of three types of letters or, in extreme cases, offer a recommendation that the person be removed from his or her job. Austin’s board can also refer cases for criminal prosecution by city attorneys, but it has not done so in recent decades,” according to the article.
  • Pay-to-Play a Good Bet in D.C.: A report from the Washington Post tells us that, as a result of a District of Columbia Council Member who cast a deciding vote on a no-bid sports gambling contract, his cousin will receive a $3 million subcontract from the gambling company.  The council member says he has no financial interest in his cousin’s company and is not familiar with it, despite the fact that it has the same street address as the council member’s construction company.
  • Charity under Fire for Political Activity: According to the Los Angeles Times , the California Attorney General filed a lawsuit against Move America Forward, a charity that sends care packages to troops, alleging “misspending resources from the charity, with some going to for-profit firms and other funds going to promote the Tea Party Express and political candidates.”  That activity would be a violation of the prohibition against political campaign activity by charities, according to the suit.  The Times quoted a spokesman for the charity who said that “much of the money paid was reimbursement for expenses he incurred in organizing nationwide tours with rallies for the troops that featured entertainers. He said the attorney general investigators mistook the reimbursement of expenses such as renting buses and hotel rooms for rally participants, and ‘fair’ commissions for fundraising.”
  • Scam PACs on the RisePolitico tells us that “Conservative Majority Fund has raised nearly $10 million since mid-2012, but has made just $48,400 in political contributions.”  The article defines “scam PACs” as “organizations that take advantage of loosened campaign finance laws to reap windfalls for insiders while directing only a small portion of receipts to actual political advocacy.”  Politico notes that even President Trump’s campaign has issued a warning that “dishonest fundraising groups” are using the President’s name to raise money.
  • Bemoaning in Beantown: “A group of lobbyists, businesses, and nonprofits” presented a legal analysis to city officials complaining that Boston’s new lobby ordinance “could create barriers and burdens,” according to the Boston Globe.  The analysis expresses concern that “many individuals participating in a single meeting or phone call would be required to register as a lobbyist, submit disclosure reports, and pay a registration fee.”