While Missouri's divided government - a Democratic governor with a Republican Legislature - can at times be contentious, this years session began with some hope of movement on the issue of Missouri Ethics laws. In his State of the State speech, Governor Jay Nixon (D) pointed out that Missouri is home to some of the weakest election and lobbying laws in the country:
http://www.kansascity.com/...
"We have the weakest ethics laws in the nation," Nixon said. "It's not fair. It's not right. And you and I know it."
It didn't take long before some of those weaknesses became apparent. In a long standing practice that occurs in Missouri, an official meeting of the telecommunication committee was held outside of the state capital at the Jefferson City Country Club. The meeting, attended by as many lobbyists as legislators was streamed online, as legislators downed alcohol and discussed the impact of legislation that had nothing to do with their committee.
The Missouri country club event that went wrong may have been the tipping point for at least superficial policy changes. Leading Missouri Republican John Diehl, Speaker of the House from St. Louis subburbs to make a change in the policy:
http://www.kansascity.com/...
Diehl, a Republican from the St. Louis suburbs, said that while there has been no formal change to House rules, he has instructed committee chairman that there is to be no more free food provided during meetings.
“The committee chairmen serve at my pleasure,” he said, “so I have a feeling it will be followed.”
The move comes amid renewed debate in both the state House and Senate regarding legislative ethics. Missouri is the only state with both no caps on campaign contributions and no limits on lobbyist gifts to elected officials.
Missouri's current ethical and campaign system though still faces a long uphill climb.
While many Americans focus on Citizens United, long before Citizens United, states like KMissouri practiced campaign finance laws at the state level that went much farther than even Citizens United. Through unlimited spend capability to direct giving in Missouri that allows billionares to clear the field for desired candidate, Missouri is viewed by many as providing an unethical advantage for the rich to play.
With little limits in Missouri, the direct give has allowed billionaire Rex Sinquefield to impact politics in a way that few could have imagined years ago.
http://www.kansascity.com/...
Sinquefield provided $1.75 Million (MILLION) in donations to Republican hopefuls for Governor and Lt. Governor in the 2014 race. This hard money give gives life to what Democrats warned about in 2012:
http://www.stltoday.com/...
"We're basically the 'Wild, Wild West' when it comes to ethics laws," said state Rep. Tishaura Jones, D-St. Louis.
The state Supreme Court quashed the Legislature's 2010 ethics and campaign finance law on a technicality in February, and while some lawmakers pushed for a replacement, no action was taken.
Missouri's ethics and campaign finance laws rank among the most lax in the country, according to a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigation released earlier this year. Missouri also remains one of only four states with no limits on campaign contributions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
Of those states, Missouri is the only one also without limits on what lobbyists can legally give to lawmakers.
In hopes of changing this, even some Republicans have become concerned that the current ethics rules leave the public feeling some doubt as to the virtuous nature of their elected officials work.
With Republicans undertaking small changes others have decided enough is enough.
http://politicmo.com/...
The bill lawmakers were considering – sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Ron Richard, a Republican of Joplin – would enact modest changes, including a two-year cooling off period between when a legislator leaves the legislature and when they could be employed to try to influence it, a ban on out-of-state travel paid for by lobbyists, and additional transparency requirements.
Citing a reluctance by other lawmakers, Sen. Rob Schaaf, a Republican of St. Joseph, filed a resolution to call on voters to amend Missouri’s constitution to enact larger changes by Missouri voters. Schaaf’s amendment would cap campaign contributions, ban lobbyist gifts, ban corporate and union political contributions and prohibit politicians from working for lobbyists when they leave government.
“The only way that we can ensure this becomes law that can’t be changed back by the legislature is to make it as an amendment to the constitution,” he said.
When we talk about Citizens United, we think about big PAC money. In Missouri, though, the ease of stroking a million dollar check to the candidate of your choice is a much more certain way to curry direct favor from an elected official.
Rep. Schaff penned his editorial in the St. Louis dispatch arguing that now is the most important time to change Missouri ethics laws.
http://www.stltoday.com/...
First, money buys access. Imagine that you’re a lobbyist. Elected officials have busy schedules, and it can be hard to get meetings with them. But if you’ve given an official a $10,000 campaign contribution, or if you regularly take him and his colleagues out to dinner, you probably won’t have a problem. You can just call him on his cell phone to discuss an issue, and he’ll make your call a priority. You’ll be able to tell him your side of the story, respond to any concerns he might have, and perhaps make plans to discuss the matter further over a meal that you will pay for.
Second, money buys favors. Here’s how this works: First, you establish yourself as a reliable supporter of an elected official, sending big checks her way to support her re-election campaign. Then, when a bill that would hurt your client’s bottom line is referred to her committee, you ask her to quietly kill it by refusing to give it a hearing. Though she’s made no promise to do you such a favor, she knows in the back of her mind that you will likely stop giving her checks if she doesn’t. She doesn’t know enough about the bill to decide whether it would hurt Missourians for her to kill it, but she does know that losing your support would hurt her chances of re-election. So she kills the bill for you.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, money buys fear. If you have money, and if you show that you’re willing to use it, elected officials will fear that you will fund their opponents. Because of this, many of them will do what you want without you so much as giving them a dime. The more money you have, the bigger the threat, and the more they will fear you.