RALEIGH -- Democratic leaders in the state Senate unveiled a major ethics bill Tuesday that seeks to provide a public financing option for most statewide campaigns, increase access to some government records and ban elected officials from coercing political contributions from those they regulate.
"The days of pay-to-play are over," declared Senate Majority Leader Martin Nesbitt, an Asheville Democrat. "This is all about good government and transparency. We think government works better when the public can see what's going on."
But within hours of the draft legislation being made public, it was being flogged for either trying to do too much or too little.
Republicans criticized the inclusion of a series of provisions to extend public campaign financing to those running for attorney general, state treasurer, agriculture commissioner, labor commissioner and secretary of state.
Used in statewide judicial races since 2002, the expanded program has an estimated cost of about $3.8 million per election cycle and would be paid for through new fees imposed on industries and professions regulated by the people elected to fill the offices. Candidates who wish to raise money from private sources could opt out.
Many Republicans object in principle to state money paying for political campaigns, and they said its inclusion in what was supposed to be a bipartisan effort could force them to vote no, even though there's a lot in the bill they would otherwise support.
"They're trying to jam it down our throats," said Rep. Paul "Skip" Stam of Apex, who leads the Republicans in the House. "Well, I for one am not going to be jammed."
Clean government advocates hailed public financing as a way to limit the influence of large private donors, though they were more muted in their praise for other parts of the legislation.
"It's a good first step," said Josh Glasser, a field coordinator for the nonpartisan reform group Common Cause.
What it would do
If approved, the legislation would double the "cooling-off period" to one year before departing legislators and high-ranking state employees could register as lobbyists and make it illegal for them to solicit gifts, favors or promises of future employment from firms doing business with the state. The bill also seeks to make it a low-level felony for an individual to intentionally circumvent limits on campaign contributions by giving money through straw donors.
"We've got a systemic money-in-politics problem," said Damon Circosta, the executive director of the N.C. Center for Voter Education, which has pushed for public financing programs. "We need a comprehensive solution. That solution includes reform to our ethics laws as well as an alternative to the campaign money chase."
Many of the ethics provisions now under consideration were drafted in direct response to recent scandals involving high-ranking Democrats and wealthy donors who appear to have been rewarded with board appointments, government contracts and other plums.
The Easley fine
The campaign of former Gov. Mike Easley was fined $100,000 by the State Board of Elections last year for undisclosed campaign flights provided by supporter McQueen Campbell, while criminal investigations are proceeding into questionable contributions from donors to the campaigns of Gov. Bev Perdue and Senate Leader Marc Basnight, both Democrats.
Wilmington businessman Rusty Carter recently accepted a plea deal for illegally funneling money through his employees to candidates, now a misdemeanor. And former Easley aide Ruffin Poole pleaded guilty in federal court to income tax violations related to an investigation into the Easley administration; other confidants of the former governor have been subpoenaed.
Watered down
The state House approved a trio of ethics bills last year with overwhelming bipartisan support, but key Senate committees failed to take up the issue until Tuesday. The Senate bill failed to include some of the tougher provisions from the House version supported by members of both parties.
"Considering that two of the governor's and Senate president pro tem's largest campaign contributors are the subject of criminal inquiries, one would have hoped the Senate would have gone further," said Joe Sinsheimer, a Democratic consultant turned watchdog.
Though the legislature has been meeting in its current session since May 12, copies of the Senate bill weren't e-mailed out until 11 p.m. Monday, less than 12 hours before the Judiciary Committee was scheduled to vote.
"Most of us don't think ethics reform is something that needs to be done in the dark of night," said Sen. Phil Berger, an Eden Republican and the Senate minority leader. "It needs to be done in the open. It needs to be done in public and in the full view of the remainder of the legislature."
Nesbitt, the majority leader, said the bill will be fast-tracked in the Senate, potentially coming to the floor for a vote as soon as today.
Some House Democrats rated the Senate legislation as being too timid and said the bill would need to be strengthened in conference between the two chambers before it could get their support.
"I don't think there's anything in the bill that the House fundamentally disagrees with," said Rep. Rick Glazier, a Fayetteville Democrat. "It's the things that are not in there. ... We're going to have to make it tougher, and I think we will."
Staff writers Dan Kane and J. Andrew Curliss contributed to this report.
