Ethics in politics? Missouri legislators will try, again, to tighten laws

They dine, take trips and enjoy ballgames on lobbyists’ tabs. And when they leave the Legislature, some immediately become lobbyists, representing the interest groups whose fates they oversaw.

It’s a political culture that sets the state apart, because other states limit all or most of those practices.

Some legislators — Republican and Democrat alike — say they hope this is the year that Missouri tightens the law.

“The massive amounts of checks that are being written are not good for the process,” said Sen. Scott Rupp, R-Wentzville. “It’s given voters another reason to be negative against elected officials.”

Legislators have filed at least 10 bills so far to address various ethics issues. The most comprehensive approach was announced Tuesday by Secretary of State Jason Kander, a Democrat and Missouri’s chief elections official.

The 217-page bill, introduced by Rep. Kevin McManus, D-Kansas City, would reinstate campaign contribution limits, ban lobbyist gifts, require legislators to wait three years before becoming lobbyists and give the Missouri Ethics Commission more power and resources to enforce the law.

In a new twist, whistleblowers who provided information about ethics violations could receive 10 percent of the fines collected for the violation they revealed. Kander said that provision was modeled on a law that rewards Medicaid fraud tipsters.

At a news conference in his Capitol office, Kander said his proposal would move Missouri from being the nation’s worst to its best in terms of governmental ethics rules.

“It’s time we get serious about this,” he said. “All over the state, Missourians are wondering whether the Legislature is ever going to address this issue.”

Ethics bills have foundered for several years, and House Republican leaders left ethics off their priority list again this year. But some Senate Republicans say momentum may be mounting, at least for piecemeal changes.

“I’m gonna do it in phases,” said Senate Majority Leader Ron Richard, R-Joplin, singling out limits on lobbyist gifts and a mandatory cooling-off period before legislators become lobbyists.

Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, is pushing for a broader approach, one that limits campaign contributions. The governor has said donation caps are needed to increase public trust.

In his “State of the State” speech last year, Nixon warned that if legislators didn’t act, he would help get the issue on the statewide ballot this fall. At least one petition that would set donation limits has already been filed with the secretary of state.

An initiative drive in 1994 got a campaign finance reform measure on the ballot. It passed by a ratio of 3 to 1.

Courts later said those caps — of $100 to $300, depending on the office sought — were too low and threw them out. They were replaced by an alternative passed by the Legislature, also in 1994.

As attorney general, Nixon defended the limits all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which upheld them in 2000. The limits were adjusted for inflation and ranged from $275 to $1,075 by that time.

The Legislature has twice repealed the limits, first in 2006 and again in 2008 after the Missouri Supreme Court restored them because of the way the repeal was structured.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Missouri is one of six states with no limits on campaign contributions. The others are Alabama, Nebraska, Oregon, Virginia and Utah.

Since Missouri’s limits were repealed, campaigns have become increasingly dependent on huge checks from special-interest groups and wealthy activists, such as retired investment company executive Rex Sinquefield of St. Louis.

Last year alone, Sinquefield made more than $3.8 million in political contributions, according to online records at the Missouri Ethics Commission. Much of his largesse went to groups and candidates advocating his goals of increasing school choice and cutting income taxes.

If limits were restored, there’s no clear consensus on where they should be set.

Under Kander’s proposal, candidates for the state House could accept contributions no larger than $500. State Senate candidates would be limited to $1,000 contributions while the maximum donation to a candidate for governor or other statewide office would be $2,600.

Some legislators would set higher contribution limits.

Sen. Jamilah Nasheed, D-St. Louis, has proposed setting a uniform contribution cap of $2,600 per election for legislative candidates as well as statewide candidates.

Nasheed said that “$2,600 is reasonable. It’s the same as the federal limits.”

Rupp’s proposal ranges from $2,500 for House candidates to $25,000 for statewide offices. He said his goal was to let candidates raise enough money to get their message out but to rein in the mega-donors.

“The $350,000, $400,000 contributions from one person — when I voted to get rid of the limits, I never imagined that would happen,” Rupp said.

Critics argue that contribution limits don’t work. Big money can be routed around the limits — through political parties, unregulated nonprofit organizations or a network of political action committees, for example.

Kander and McManus respond that their bill takes aim at “money-laundering” and “sham nonprofits” by enforcing the law against concealing a donor’s identity.

Under their proposal, “you’re not allowed to take actions, the purpose of which is to circumvent campaign contribution limits,” Kander said.

For instance, the bill would bar a candidate from receiving money from a political action committee that drew the majority of its funding from an individual who had already given the maximum.

Some legislators would rather focus on lobbyist and conflict-of-interest regulations.

Sen. John Lamping, R-Ladue, is leading that charge. A bill he filed would strengthen personal financial disclosure requirements by requiring legislators to divulge the nature of business entities from which they draw income, such as partnerships and limited liability corporations. Lamping also would require legislators to reimburse lobbyists for all meals and other gifts.

Others say it’s better to take smaller steps. Sen. Will Kraus, R-Lee’s Summit, for example, would set a $50 limit on lobbyist gifts.

“My approach on my bill is, what do I think I could actually get done?” Kraus said. “Back a few years ago I stopped trying to get perfect legislation and started getting the ball moving in the right direction. And that’s what mine does. It moves the ball in the right direction, and hopefully we’ll get something done this year.”

(McManus’ bill is HB1340. Rupp’s bill is SB486. Nasheed’s bill is SB555. Kraus’ bill is SB629. Lamping’s bill is SB512.)