New Mexico Attorney General Gary King highlighted an expansion of an ethics law this morning that passed the Legislature and was signed by Gov. Susana Martinez. The expansion comes to New Mexico’s Governmental Conduct Act. The changes include adding local government officials to the list of public employees who are bound by its ethical provisions.

“The new law expands and clarifies the definition of a public officer or employee covered by the Act and amends the prohibition against certain designated political activities to include elected or appointed officials or employees of state and local government agencies,” King wrote in a statement. “This means employees and officers of village, county, city governments, (the definition in the bill says “local government agency” means a political subdivision of the state or an agency of a political subdivision of the state) are now subject to the ethical principles and prohibitions set out in the Act.”

The act previously only applied to state employees.

King has long pushed for such a measure to become law. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Tim Eichenberg, D-Albuquerque, passed both the House and Senate with no dissenting votes.

The bill would also create other changes to the Act. One such change would bar employees of state and local government agencies from participating, either directly or indirectly, in the contracting process.

Another change would prohibit state agencies from entering into a contract with the business of any employee or public officer or the officer’s or employee’s family member or spouse unless the contract goes through a competitive process and there is public notice.

“As Attorney General, I have long held that the absence of a uniform set of ethical standards, applied statewide, undermines public faith in government in general and creates confusion in the public mind,” King wrote. “More importantly, the newly expanded code of conduct will most definitely make it easier for law enforcement to address corruption all over New Mexico.”

King, a Democrat, won reelection last year for a second term as Attorney General.

Denish says a commission is overdue given the run of scandals that have sent several high-profile public officials to prison.

Martinez says an ethics commission would amount to nothing more than window dressing.

Their differing views were on display Sunday at the second gubernatorial debate at Congregation Albert in Albuquerque.

“On day one I’m going to appoint an independent ethics commission,” Denish told the crowd at the Albuquerque synagogue. “It’s shameful that the governor and the Legislature haven’t been able to get this done. This will be a commission with teeth. We need to get this done. The time for talk is past.”

Martinez swatted away the idea, telling the crowd that a commission is “merely politicians appointing other politicians to review the conduct of politicians.”

At the core of the two candidates’ disagreement is how well an independent ethics commission would function, if created.

More than 40 other states have ethics commissions—some more effective than others

For four years Gov. Bill Richardson and state lawmakers have wrestled over how to set up a state ethics commission, who would sit on it and who would appoint them. That an agreement has proved elusive is an understatement. The concept has proved deeply unpopular at the Capitol, and never even appeared as if it has a chance to pass.

“One thing we’ve found during this is that the devil is in the details,” said Steven Robert Allen, executive director of New Mexico Common Cause, a government watchdog group that has advocated for an ethics commission. “It’s definitely possible to set up an ethics commission that is not particularly effective. So Martinez has a point.”

But, Allen added, “a state ethics commission set up appropriately can be an effective tool to investigate claims against officials.”

Ethics commissions in other states such as Ohio and Connecticut have investigated and fined governors and other officials for ethical lapses, demonstrating that some panels have some bite and aren’t merely showpieces.

For a commission to have credibility in New Mexico, Allen said, it would have to be bi-partisan, meaning members from both political parties were appointed. It also would have to receive full funding and be empowered to issue subpoenas to conduct thorough investigations, he added.

Were New Mexico to create such a panel it would join 41 other states that already have some form of a commission, including many of its neighbors like Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Nevada, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Arizona, like New Mexico, does not have one.

Denish would use executive order to create commission; Martinez wants to use State Police

Denish’s campaign said Monday that her idea would be to create a non-partisan independent ethics commission by executive order on the first day she is governor.

“She would like for the governor, Legislature and the courts to have appointments to this commission,” Denish’s spokesman, Chris Cervini, said in an e-mail message to The Independent.

The commission would have subpoena power and be able to turn over findings from its investigations to the Attorney General for prosecution, Cervini said.

Martinez, on the other hand, would eschew any talk of a commission if she were elected governor. Instead she would establish a new division in the New Mexico State Police to help root out corruption “because we must treat it as a crime,” Martinez’s campaign manager Ryan Cangliosi said in an e-mail message to The Independent.

“It is a far too common occurrence these days to pick up a paper in the morning and read about another scandal, investigation and shady deal involving state government.  We must put an end to the culture of corruption,” Cangliosi said in his e-mail.

Cangliosi didn’t answer whether Martinez would veto legislation creating an ethics commission if it made it to the governor’s desk.

2010 proposal could have punished whistleblowers; advocates ended up opposing it

Advocates for the state ethics commission in New Mexico started pushing for its creation in 2007 after former state treasurer Robert Vigil was convicted of attempted extortion. The push for a commission has only gotten louder as other public officials, including former state Senate President Manny Aragon, have gone to federal prison for corruption.

Despite the constant drumbeat of scandals, the concept has never gotten close to passing, thanks to a coalition of Democratic and Republican lawmakers who oppose the idea.

This year, advocates for a commission actively opposed the bill after lawmakers added language that would have punished a  person who publicly spoke of their testimony before the commission more harshly than those who are found to have violated the public trust.

“When you have a complaint department you want to disconnect it from the people who are being complained about,” said Sen. Clint Harden, R-Clovis, explaining why he doesn’t like the commission idea. “I agree with Martinez, and I don’t think the fox should be guarding the henhouse.”

Harden said he’d be more open to discussing a concept not often mentioned at the Capitol — limiting how long legislative leaders can serve in their leadership positions.

“I’m not saying we should term limit the Speaker of the House or the president pro tem,” Harden said. “But those kind of issues should be on the table. I’m comfortable with the Senate leadership. But I just think it’s something we all should look at.

Using State Police would put all control under the Governor

Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Albuquerque, however, says New Mexico desperately needs an independent state ethics commission because of all the corruption that has given New Mexico a black eye. A commission would follow the best practices already set up in many other states.

Creating a new division within the State Police, as Martinez has proposed, would mean all decisions would come from the executive branch, McSorley said, making some skeptical of any prosecutions.

“She and the executive department want to control any investigations of ethical misdeeds,” McSorley said. “That’s basically what we’ve had with Bill Richardson. She is showing her contempt for best practices across the nation.”

The November general election will decide which of the two men replaces outgoing District 5 Commissioner Sandy Jones, who has argued the PRC is unfairly maligned in the press.

Jones made headlines last year for hiring convicted embezzler Elizabeth Martin as his executive assistant at $72,000 a year. The sprawling District 5 covers southeastern New Mexico, including Socorro, Catron, Grants, Hidalgo, Luna and Sierra counties, and most of Doña Ana County.

Both McCamley and Hall told The Independent they want to see increased PRC scrutiny of utility and insurance companies’ rate hikes, and increased accountability at the PRC’s semi-autonomous Division of Insurance. But the candidates differed on how they would achieve those goals. McCamley, 32, believes a systematic overhaul of Commission structure may be necessary. Hall, 73, says reform boils down to personal integrity and commissioners taking decision-making power away from staffers.

Hall refuses public debates

Hall has refused to hold public debates with McCamley, saying he can interact with the public and tell voters about the issues and his experience through his website and speeches.

“I am very disappointed in my opponent,” McCamley told The Independent. “I think people need to see the candidates together to find out where they stand and how effective they are as communicators. If you’re not an effective communicator, especially at a place like the PRC, I don’t think you’re going to be effective.”

Ethics front and center for McCamley

Bill McCamley

Both candidates emphasize the need for ethical reform at the PRC, but they offered very different solutions to the problem.

“Ethical issues with any elected board create a lack of trust between the people and elected officials,” McCamley told The Independent. “When there are these problems, democracy breaks down because regular folks have a hard time trusting elected officials to do what they’re elected to do — like standing up to corporations and working on complicated issues like health insurance.”

McCamley called for the creation of an independent “blue ribbon” task force that would identify how best to “strengthen barriers” between regulated industry and the Commission to reduce opportunities for unethical behavior.

“(Ethics) training is a good start but we need to establish rules about how and when people can meet folks, dealing with lobbyists — those types of issues,” McCamley said. “One criticism I’ve heard of the PRC is that it is such a below-the-radar board that it’s easy to have big corporations have their lobbyists build relationships and friendships with those on the board – and a lot of times, I think there’s a risk that decisions are made based on those friendships. When I was elected to the Doña Ana County Commission, there were similar issues. The first thing I did was rewrite the ethics policy. … That signified that we were making a new beginning. We weren’t going to let the ethic of the past affect what we’re doing now.”

“That allows you to move forward on more policy issues,” McCamley said.

McCamley sat on a statewide Ethics Task Force in 2007, representing local governments. He also served in 2009 on the state board of Common Cause.

Commissioners should lead by example, Hall says

But Hall, a retired Ruidoso general contractor and former Republican state legislator, expressed skepticism that structural changes or training could correct a commissioner’s ethical lapses.

Instead, commissioners must lead by example, he said.

“You’re not going to force ethics on anybody,” he told The Independent Wednesday. “You could fill up the law books and you won’t change an unethical person’s reality. Look at Washington, D.C.”

Hall would, however, call for a review of the PRC’s Utilities and Insurance divisions’ regulations, he said.

Ben Hall

“Those need to be reviewed by commissioners and their staff,” Hall said. “Some rules came along that I don’t know where they came from. They’re just inserted in there by the companies themselves. Most people don’t know this, but an insurance company has a right to increase your premium as they please, on your home, vehicles, health insurance, based on your credit ratings. There are a lot of people barely getting by. I don’t think it’s right that insurance companies should be able to change premiums based on credit ratings; you pay insurance up front, so there’s no credit involved. That’s damn sure wrong.”

One leading property insurance company in the state netted $29 million last year from credit rating-based premium adjustments, Hall alleged.

Contrasting views on proposed restructuring of the PRC

The PRC regulates the state’s electrical, natural gas, and water utilities, insurance industry, licenses ambulances and taxi cabs, and administers the state Fire Marshal’s office — for the moment, at least.

Legislators are exploring the possibility of dismembering the PRC, moving the Transportation Bureau and Fire Marshall’s office, and the Commission’s semi-autonomous and controversial Division of Insurance, to other executive-branch agencies.

Hall thinks that’s a bad idea.

“If you got a good group of commissioners up there trying to do the right thing, you could convince the Legislature to leave us alone for a while and let us try to clean it up ourselves,” Hall said. “But if the PRC doesn’t straighten up, legislators will do away with ‘em or take their punches away and maybe have the Governor appoint the Commission instead of it being elected.”

The semi-autonomous superintendent of insurance should run the insurance division on a day-to-day basis, Hall said.

“But when it comes to a rate change of any kind, that needs to be done by elected officials,” Hall said. “It should at least be discussed with the Commission.”

McCamley’s proposed restructuring task force would not reflexively reject the legislative proposals, he said, but would carefully consider all options.

“I propose a six-month restructuring task force,” McCamley said. “However we can find a way to make the insurance division accountable to the public, I would support. That could be by making the superintendent of insurance directly responsible to the PRC; right now that person can only be fired ‘for cause.’ Or we could make the PRC responsible for setting rates like they do for utilities. Or it can be by moving it (the insurance division) out. I don’t think what we have right now is strong enough. One person is pretty much appointed and left alone. And that’s not working. If you make that person (the Superintendent of Insurance) elected, at least you make them accountable to the public.”

Candidates would not interfere with hiring decisions

A persistent problem at the PRC involves commissioners’ interference with staff hiring decisions, staffers and managers have told The Independent.

Both McCamley and Hall pledged not to involve themselves with staff hiring decisions beyond their personal executive assistants.

“You got bureau chiefs and a chief of staff,” Hall said. “They know what kind of people they need. It’s not for me to drag in a bunch of names. As long as I don’t find out there’s nepotism going on, I won’t meddle in it.”

However, Hall believes PRC staffers are too powerful and commissioners need to take a larger role in reviewing staff decisions.

“Commissioners inadvertently gave authority away to the staff,” Hall said. “They went to play golf and said, ‘here, bureau chief, you make this decision.’”

The government distributed funds to organizations protesting gay marriage and homosexuality. (Flickr/Dan the Webmaster)

An obscure branch of the federal government responsible for distributing millions of tax dollars to religious organizations is drawing criticism for poor oversight over how federal grant money is spent and an overall lack of transparency. Good-government advocates warn that without rigorous transparency, the likelihood for corruption, ethics violations and unconstitutional spending of tax dollars is high.

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) is a sub-agency of the Department of Human Services. The programs administered by the ACF that religious organizations most often use — Healthy Marriage, Abstinence Only and The Compassion Capital Fund — cost more than $255 million in 2008, according to the most recent annual report on file,

To critics of these programs, this amounts to a dangerous recipe for potential abuse, thanks to the political activities of many of the groups receiving funding.

In South Carolina, the Palmetto Family Council, a local affiliate of the Family Research Council (FRC), was awarded $1.2 million through Healthy Marriage and Abstinence Only grants from 2004 to 2009. According to its blog, the “top priority” for the group in 2006 was South Carolina’s anti-gay marriage amendment. Earlier this month, Palmetto’s president, Oran Smith, condemned public funding of a gay and lesbian group’s annual statewide festival, citing concerns about using “public funds for a festival that is political or indecent or both.”

The Indiana Family Institute, another local FRC affiliate, received $50,000 in direct federal funding and is listed as a third party contractor for the Abstinence Singles/Lake County Marriage Coalition. The Abstinence Singles grant award is $941,000 per year through 2011. Also known as Hoosier Family, the Indiana Family Institute is advocating for an anti-gay marriage amendment in 2010.

The Iowa Family Policy Center (IFPC) received more than $3 million in federal funds to pay for a marriage-mentoring program. The program, called Marriage Matters, was found not to be a third-party contractor but rather a trademark of the outspoken anti-gay group. IFPC has garnered headlines for its opposition to same-sex marriage, including public allegations that homosexuality poses a greater public health risk than second-hand smoke.

The Iowa Family Policy Center’s acceptance of federal funds, coupled with its religious political agenda, prompted the ACLU of Iowa to announce it would investigate whether the funding violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Potential abuses of ACF funding can be difficult to monitor, because the ACF relies on self-reporting by grant recipients to track their own spending. It relies on citizen complaints of wrongdoing to launch an investigation into misuse of funds. And all the while, proactive follow-up by ACF is rare.

President George W. Bush announced the creation of the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives after he took office in January 2001. Separation of church and state advocates were outraged when President Barack Obama elected to continue the program under the name Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

The day after taking office, President Obama issued a memorandum to the heads of executive agencies calling for new vigor in fulfilling the public’s need for transparency and openness in government. But for all the authority allotted the ACF, there remains considerable mystery surrounding how grant money is awarded and spent.

Brigitte Amiri, senior staff attorney with the ACLU of New York, said, “I have started using the opening line ‘the promise of transparency is illusory’ in all my Freedom of Information Act requests because it is.”

Amiri has filed more than a half-dozen Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with the HHS in the last few years. In a recent case, Amiri waited 8 months for a partial FOIA response from the ACF and is still waiting, two years later, for a complete report.

According to the Freedom of Information Act, governmental agencies are required to respond to a FOIA request within 30 days.

“We can’t sit and wait [for a FOIA] while money is continuing to be spent unconstitutionally, so we sue,” Amiri said. “We [ACLU] have the ability to sue for the information we need, but what about the average citizen? They aren’t going to be able to sue in order to get what is already supposed to be public.”

The Iowa Independent had a similar experience during its investigation of Iowa Family Policy Center. After filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the ACF regarding IFPC, The Iowa Independent waited four months for a partial response and was forced to file a second request – called a reconsideration — for information that was omitted. The ACF has only three full-time Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) specialists on staff, which creates staggering wait times for fulfillment of information requests.

ACF spokesman Kenneth Wolfe never responded to dozens of e-mails and phone calls requesting comment regarding award payment schedules and specifics on the role of the ACF in policing faith-based awards. Wolfe was also asked if a so-called clawback provision exists as a way for the government to recoup money spent inappropriately by faith-based and other grant recipients, another question that was ignored.

These requests for information were included in a certified letter mailed to former Assistant Secretary for Children and Families Carmen Nazario, and then hand delivered to Acting Assistant Secretary for Children and Families David Hansell after Nazario stepped down in July. Again, the agency failed to respond.

The Assistant Secretary for Children and Families is a politically appointed position.

Anne Weismann, chief counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), shares Amiri’s concerns about lack of transparency. CREW was responsible for gaining the release of more than five million “lost” Bush era e-mails, and recently filed a Freedom of Information Act requesting John Yoo’s torture memos.

Weismann said she wishes she could be more optimistic about the Obama mandate for transparency, but the policy isn’t being put into practice.

“Phone calls, faxes and e-mails to executive agencies go unanswered, redactions continue to happen,” she said. “We end up suing the government over and over again for the same type of public information, and the American people end up spending money on unnecessary litigation.”

Wolfe’s refusal to respond to requests for information from The Iowa Independent is not an isolated incident, observers say, as his office has typically been a roadblock to information on taxpayer money to religious organizations instead of an advocate for transparency.

In addition to his former role as a Republican Congressional staffer, Wolfe has been outspoken in his social conservative positions. In response to a lawsuit over abortion assistance given to a minor by Catholic Charities in 2008, he made an official statement in his role as ACF spokesman, “Our agency is one that supports human life, and we take that responsibility seriously.” Catholic Charities organizations throughout the United States receive millions in federal funding.

No matter what the roadblock inside the ACF, limited access to public information regarding federal grant money and lack of transparency remain the norm. Addressing what can be done about continued government opacity, CREW’s Wiesman said, “People need to speak out and continue to speak out about the continued lack of transparency because the administration isn’t getting the point.”

The course is being developed in collaboration with New Mexico State University and a task force is working on a syllabus now, according to the paper. The soon-to-be ethics course for New Mexico’s legislators comes amid a run of public corruption scandals in New Mexico over the past five years that have fueled a push for reform and thrust politicians and public officials into a less-than-flattering light with the public.

It’ll be interesting to see what’s on the syllabus once it’s finalized.

Former chief of staff Dan Mayfield‘s prohibition on PRC employees speaking to journalists was still in effect, staffers have told The Independent as recently as Tuesday.

Former interim chief of staff Johnny Montoya, who has been promoting ethics and transparency reform at the PRC, has said he is unaware of such a policy. But that came as a surprise to employees approached by The Independent.

“Headline: PRC employees denied their protected free speech rights,” quipped one employee.

Montoya is searching through Mayfield’s policy memos to clarify the situation, spokesman Gerald Garner said late Wednesday morning.

Montoya has called for an ethics and transparency overhaul at the PRC, but incoming chief of staff Michael A. Rivera did not mention ethics or transparency in a prepared statement released by the PRC Tuesday.

Ethics training session first of several

Tuesday’s ethics “train the trainers” session was the first of three to be conducted by UNM Institute of Public Law Director Paul Biderman, PRC spokesman Gerald Garner said.

PRC commissioners themselves will receive ethics training June 29.

Tuesday’s training session covered “nuts and bolts, the foundational laws governing ethics” and going through the PRC’s staff ethics survey responses, Garner told The Independent.

After a series of well-publicized scandals at the powerful regulatory body, a staff ethics survey was commissioned last year. Employee responses revealed low staff morale and allegations of unethical and illegal conduct by commissioners.

Two more “train the trainers” sessions will be held later this month, at which “values-based decision making” will be discussed and the PRC will establish protocols for handling ethical issues, Garner said.

Garner and seven other PRC employees are undergoing the training, and will then conduct training for the rest of the staff of more than 270 employees, he said.

Rivera arrives at the post during a time of transition and controversy at the powerful body, which regulates insurance companies, utilities, telecommunications, transportation services, pipelines and the state fire marshal’s office.

Three of the five commissioners to which Rivera now reports will be replaced in the November general elections.

Controversy at the Insurance Division has led to resignations and an effort by commissioners to seize greater direct control over insurance rate setting.

Rivera will leave his current position as tribal administrator at the Nambé Pueblo, where he reports to a seven-member Tribal Council and the tribe’s Governor and Lieutenant Governor.

“His experience makes him well qualified to take on the challenging role of PRC chief of staff,” PRC Commissioner Jason Marks said Tuesday.

Rivera has held his position at Nambé since June 2009. Before that, he worked as a grant writing consultant, a youth development director in Mora and a small business development director at Luna Community College in Las Vegas.

Rivera replaces interim chief of staff Johnny Montoya, who stepped into the position from the Insurance Division after former chief of staff Dan Mayfield resigned to run a successful campaign for Santa Fe County Commissioner.

Mayfield couldn’t have stayed at the PRC while running for office without violating the federal Hatch Act, which prohibits public employees who administer federal funds from running for office in a partisan race.

Montoya previously called for his replacement to implement an ethics and transparency reform program at the PRC.

Rivera is a “good fit” for the PRC and a good candidate for the reform agenda, Montoya indicated Tuesday.

“I look forward to working with him,” Montoya said.

Under Montoya, the PRC began an ethics training program.

But in prepared statements Tuesday, Rivera did not mention transparency or ethics.

According to a PRC press release, Rivera’s goals include “developing and maintaining clear lines of communication and direction between his office and all employees and divisions of the agency,” “fostering a teamwork environment” with commissioners, “running a sound and fiscally accountable budge,” building relationships with state legislators and “continuing the great work of previous administrators.”

While a number of high-profile ethics and transparency measures died as the clock expired on the regular session last week, the New Mexico Legislature also sent a number of significant proposals to the governor for action.

Ethics and transparency measures that were approved include a whistleblower protection law, reform of the State Investment Council, the creation of a so-called “Sunshine Portal” and an expansion of webcasting in the House of Representatives.

“Every one of those seems to be a really good measure. And the positive thing is, the good ones seemed to make it through and the bad ones didn’t,” said House Minority Whip Keith Gardner, R-Roswell.

Gardner cited the proposal to create a state ethics commission as a measure that was appropriately killed, saying the secrecy provisions in that legislation – which cost the bill the support of ethics activists – made it unworkable.

While activists were disappointed about the deaths of some ethics and transparency proposals, the sunshine portal is one important piece of legislation that passed, said Steven Robert Allen, executive director of Common Cause New Mexico. He said another important move toward greater transparency was the House’s expansion of webcasting to include video from the floor and audio and video of committee meetings.

“One thing that we saw in last year’s session was this great move to increase openness over the entire process of government in New Mexico,” Allen said. “At the time, a lot of advocates were saying, once this door is open, it’s just going to get wider. I think we saw that this session, in particular with the sunshine portal and the expansion of webcasting to House committee rooms.”

“I think some very important things were accomplished,” Allen said, adding that he’d like to see the Senate expand webcasting as well.

The Legislature also sent the governor a bill that would reform the scandal-plagued SIC. The legislation would de-centralize authority at investment agency, taking power from the state investment officer and giving it to the council.

Approval of that legislation came after a great deal of debate.

“This bill is the result of best practices that decentralize and eliminate the many structural conflicts of interest that have been woven into the governance of these funds over time,” Sen. Tim Keller, D-Albuquerque, said about the bill, which he sponsored.

And the Legislature sent two bills to the governor that would enact a whistleblower protection law. Both pieces of legislation would protect public employees from retaliation for exposing wrongdoing by their employers.

“We’re pleased on both counts and we feel that this is another step forward in maintaining good government,” said Phil Sisneros, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office. “We fully intend to encourage the governor in a formal way – in terms of a letter – to sign the bills.”

The webcasting expansion came through changing House rules, so action from the governor wasn’t required. The other ethics and transparency bills all awaits Richardson’s action, which must come within 20 days of the end the session.

The bill now has less than 48 hours to try and get through the Senate.

“It has a good chance,” said sponsor Rep. Jose Campos, D-Santa Rosa, “it’s a good bill.”

The debate became heated at times and House Republicans at one point requested a ‘call of the House,’ meaning the chamber doors are locked and those members are not allowed to leave until it is lifted.

As it stands now, a lobbyist can collect money from several clients and then “bundle” them into a contribution to a candidate. But because of the bundling, the public–and sometimes the candidate–don’t know exactly where the money came from.

“I think it would better to make things more professional and not have contributions from lobbyists,” Rep. Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, said during the debate.

Supporters of the bill say it will allow everyone to know who’s giving money to whom. While lobbyists would not be able to directly donate, lobbyists would be permitted to deliver un-bundled donations from their clients.

The 46-24 vote came after Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones, R-Albuquerque, tried to move a substitute that  would have prevented bundling of contributions from lobbyists’ clients and exempted lobbyists’ from the ban.

”Our constituents are absolutely furious about pay-to-play,” she said, pointing a number of state scandals and arguing “there is nothing, absolutely nothing in this bill that would’ve stopped that.”

Those who have a state contract worth over $250,000 dollars would also be banned from making contributions. But opponents of the measure argued the bill would drive the political money in the state underground and not prevent the pay-to-play scandals it aims to stop.

They argue the recent pay-for-play concerns had to do with companies who sought state contracts after making sizable donations to candidates, and again said HB 118 wouldn’t stop it.

Opponents also argued that the bill wouldn’t stop contractors from using a third party to make the contributions to candidates or parties.

HB 118 has had a long fight to this point. House committees revised it and also required it be combined with a similar bill.  Tuesday’s vote came after the bills sponsor stopped debate on Monday to revise the bill again.