HomeEssential Ethics / August 16, 2019

Essential Ethics

August 16, 2019

Latest Developments:

  • The North Dakota Ethics Commission has been appointed.  The Governor’s Office announced that the selection panel, which included the Governor and the majority and minority leaders of the State Senate, chose the five members for the newly formed commission.  The panel includes a retired general, a community college president, a former teacher and mayor, a retired judge, and a retired general counsel of a medical center.  Their terms begin on September 1.  The Bismarck Tribune reports that the Governor specifically sought a nonpartisan group and did not want former lobbyists or lawmakers appointed to the Commission.
  • The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal upheld Montana’s requirement that nonprofits register as political committees if, within 60 days of an election, they run any type of advertising that refers to a candidate or ballot measure.  In National Association for Gun Rights, Inc. v. Mangan, the court found that the state’s requirement that organizations register if they spend more than $250 on a single electioneering communication was substantially related to important governmental interests and did not violate the First Amendment.  However, the court struck down the state’s requirement that the organization have a treasurer who is a registered voter in the State of Montana.
  • The Kentucky Legislative Ethics Commission announced that its Legal Counsel, Laura Hromyak Hendrix, has been selected as its new Executive Director and will assume that position on September 1. She replaces John Schaaf, who is retiring.  The State Journal has an article with biographical information about Ms. Hromyak Hendrix. 

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. Nielsen Merksamer co-chairs these programs.  To sign up, use the following links:  PLI Two-Day Conference in Washington D.C.; PLI One-Day Program in San Francisco (also webcast)

In Case You Missed It:

  • FARA-Related Prosecution Begins: The New York Times reports that, this week, the U.S. Department of Justice initiated a prosecution related to a potential failure to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.  In a matter arising from the Mueller investigation, Former Obama White House Counsel and prominent Washington lawyer Gregory Craig is charged with misleading federal agents about his activities on behalf of foreign interests.
  • When the Charitable is Political:  The New York Times is reporting on the increasing scrutiny that previously apolitical charities face when their benefactors are revealed as supporting unpopular political causes or candidates. In the wake of the controversy surrounding billionaire Stephen Ross’ political contributions and the ensuing pushback against his businesses and recipient charitable causes, many organizations are concerned that the trend may compromise their largest donors’ support. Many charities have increasingly come to depend on these large donors whose political activity is most at risk of exposure.
  • Perils of Contract Lobbying:  The lobbyist for the Missouri Police Chiefs Association quit “after a state audit blasted his role in a no-bid contract scheme that cost taxpayers $74,000,” according to the Louis Post-Dispatch.  According to the article, an appropriation was shifted from the Missouri Highway Patrol to the Department of Public Safety, which was then run by a former President of the Missouri Police Chiefs Association, who steered the contract to the Missouri Police Chiefs Charitable Foundation.
  • Local Government Coordination Questioned:  The California Fair Political Practices Commission is opening an investigation into whether three local transportation agencies conspired to promote an initiative measure to raise Bay Area tolls, according to the San Jose Mercury News.  California law prohibits the use of public monies to promote or oppose initiative measures.  The increased tolls are estimated to generate $4.5 billion in revenue to the agencies in the next few years, although the funds are now held in escrow due to legal challenges.