From the CNS
Archive:
Legislators Favor Slate of New Ethics Laws
By David Abrams
Capital News Service
Tuesday, October 24, 2000
ANNAPOLIS - Maryland legislative leaders are predicting quick passage
of a proposed bill requiring online reporting of lobbyists' expenditures
and stricter restrictions on their activities in the State House.
The Study Commission on Lobbyist Ethics, formed by the Legislature in
1999 to address public concerns of improper political activity in
Annapolis, finalized its report and draft bill last week.
The bill would bring about what the commission calls the most
extensive changes to state ethics laws since some lobbyists were first
required to register in 1979.
The bill could be one of the first passed during the 2001 General
Assembly session, said Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller Jr,
D-Prince George's. Miller said he will pre-file the bill and it will be
introduced in both chambers Jan. 10.
The Study Commission deliberated at the same time as a federal court
mulled charges that Delegate Tony E. Fulton, D-Baltimore, and lobbyist
Gerard E. Evans conspired to defraud Evans' clients.
The new bill would give the State Ethics Commission increased
authority over lobbyists, with the power to fine those who violate ethics
laws and to suspend or revoke their registrations.
Under the proposed new reporting requirements, lobbyists would have to
report in advance dinners and receptions held for legislative groups,
with lists printed weekly that note the date, location and legislative
group invited.
Two weeks after events, lobbyists would be required to report the
total cost of the event and the identities of any sponsors.
The information would be available on the Internet. Currently,
disclosure reports are filed at the State Ethics Commission office in
Towson.
The report also lists 12 new prohibitions against lobbyist
activities, including a ban on unregistered lobbyists doing business in
the Legislature, lobbyists soliciting or transmitting charitable
contributions for a legislator and lobbyists giving legislators personal
loans.
Some critics have suggested the law should reform the Committee on
Legislative Ethics, a self-regulating body of legislators, but plans to do
so were rejected, said Delegate John S. Arnick, D-Baltimore, who
introduced them. The Study Commission determined such a move would exceed
the limits of its purpose, which is to study lobbyists, not legislators.
The Committee on Legislative Ethics' inaction on the Fulton case is
often cited by critics bent on reform. The panel declined to reprimand
Fulton over his dealings with Evans. Soon after that decision, the
federal judge in the Evans-Fulton case said a "culture of corruption"
existed in Annapolis.
Fulton was acquitted on five charges and the jury deadlocked on
another six. Evans was convicted on nine counts of federal mail fraud and
sentenced to 2 and a half years in jail. Under current law, Evans could
still lobby in the State House after serving his jail term. Sen. Brian E.
Frosh, D-Montgomery, a Study Commission member, said self- regulation of
lawmaker ethics should be the subject of another special commission. Sen.
Richard F. Colburn, R-Dorchester, favors the reforms, but echoed concerns
by many that ethics is difficult to legislate.
"You can't legislate honesty," Colburn said.
A provision pushed by Chairman Donald Robertson and Frosh to ban all
contributions by lobbyists to political campaigns failed. Opponents argued
it would violate lobbyists' free speech rights.
But Frosh is satisfied that the recommendations are a good start.
"We're setting up a regulatory regime," he said, "pursuant to which if a
lobbyist violates the law, it's not just a fine anymore."
Copyright © 2001 University of Maryland College of Journalism
Top of Page | Home Page
|