House refuses to concur with Senate changes
Efforts to reduce the proposed high limits on individual contributions laid out in House Bill 9 - Campaign finance reporting failed Thursday and the Senate gave the bill final approval.
Sen. Ken Decaria of Evanston tried to amend the bill to bring Wyoming contribution limits closer to federal individual limits.
The Senate version of the bill, you'll recall, allows individuals to contribute $3,500 per election or up to $7,000 total if they support a candidate running both primary and general election campaigns. The Senate imposed identical limits on state Political Action Committees. The bill carries no upper limit, meaning a wealthy individual interested in getting involved in many elections could give hundreds of thousands of dollars to influence Wyoming elections.
The Senate also cut the penalty for violating the law from $25,000 to $10,000 and inserted an amendment affecting payroll deductions for contributions to PACs. That change eliminates a requirement that an employee annually sign a form authorizing the deductions.
The House refused to concur with the Senate's changes. Reps. Pete Illoway, Deb Hammons and Mary Throne were appointed to represent the House in the concurrence committee. The Senate has yet to appoint its committee members.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Opening the floodgates
Money could drown system with new limits
The Equality State Policy Center's work to close a loophole in Wyoming's campaign finance laws instead has opened the floodgates to more money in Wyoming politics.
House Bill 9 - Campaign finance reporting was drafted to address a situation that arose in the 2006 elections. A political donor used a political action committee (PAC) to give more money to one candidate than was allowed under current limits on individual contributions.
Wyoming law presently imposes no limits on state PAC contributions to candidates.
We asked legislators to consider putting a limit on state PAC contributions. They did, but then they raised the individual contribution limit to the sky.
We hope the Senate will either eliminate these sky-high limits or simply kill the bill on third reading today and try it again next year.
A little more background
We wanted the Legislature to impose a limit on state PACs because in 2006, a single individual in Natrona County used a state PAC he formed with his wife to funnel $11,200 to a county commission candidate. Using the PAC enabled him to circumvent existing limits on individual contributions. Those existing limits hold individual contributions to a single candidate to $1,000 per election or a total of $2,000 in an election cycle. ($1,000 for a primary election; $1,000 for a general election.)
The Legislature's Management Council approved an interim study of campaign financing last March and the Joint Corporations Committee agreed to plug the loophole. Unfortunately, House Bill 9 since has been turned into a vehicle to flood Wyoming campaigns with political money. As approved by the Senate Corporations Committee, the bill allows individual contributions of $3,500 per election, or $7,000 per cycle. State PACs would have the same limits EXCEPT in statewide races. A PAC contributing to a candidate for governor could give $7,000 per election or $14,000 total.
There's some irony here. Under the bill as it now stands, the guy in Natrona County could give $7,000 personally to a county commission candidate and another $7,000 through his PAC. The Legislature wants to plug an $11,000 loophole with a $14,000 cork.
Worse, a really rich contributor could give that amount of money to as many candidates as he or she chooses, because the proposed bill eliminates the $25,000 overall limit on any one individual's contributions during a cycle. There's no way that this bill keeps the playing field relatively level for grassroots candidates.
Call to action
Please contact your state senator and ask them either to reduce the limits or kill the bill. We hope an amendment will be offered on third reading tomorrow that will propose raising state contribution limits for both individuals and state PACs to the federal limit on personal contributions: $2,300 per election. (Considerably less than the $3,500 now in the bill.)
Please suggest to your legislator that he or she should protect Wyoming's election process from the corrosive effects of the far-too-high limits in the bill now.
Those arguing for the $3,500 limits maintain that the hike is justified because of inflation. That argument dismisses the political realities in Wyoming, where the average winning campaign in the 2006 general election cost about $11.700. The ESPC believes the limits should be more in proportion to the cost of campaigns in Wyoming, not campaigns conducted in Texas, New York, or California.
The Equality State Policy Center's work to close a loophole in Wyoming's campaign finance laws instead has opened the floodgates to more money in Wyoming politics.
House Bill 9 - Campaign finance reporting was drafted to address a situation that arose in the 2006 elections. A political donor used a political action committee (PAC) to give more money to one candidate than was allowed under current limits on individual contributions.
Wyoming law presently imposes no limits on state PAC contributions to candidates.
We asked legislators to consider putting a limit on state PAC contributions. They did, but then they raised the individual contribution limit to the sky.
We hope the Senate will either eliminate these sky-high limits or simply kill the bill on third reading today and try it again next year.
A little more background
We wanted the Legislature to impose a limit on state PACs because in 2006, a single individual in Natrona County used a state PAC he formed with his wife to funnel $11,200 to a county commission candidate. Using the PAC enabled him to circumvent existing limits on individual contributions. Those existing limits hold individual contributions to a single candidate to $1,000 per election or a total of $2,000 in an election cycle. ($1,000 for a primary election; $1,000 for a general election.)
The Legislature's Management Council approved an interim study of campaign financing last March and the Joint Corporations Committee agreed to plug the loophole. Unfortunately, House Bill 9 since has been turned into a vehicle to flood Wyoming campaigns with political money. As approved by the Senate Corporations Committee, the bill allows individual contributions of $3,500 per election, or $7,000 per cycle. State PACs would have the same limits EXCEPT in statewide races. A PAC contributing to a candidate for governor could give $7,000 per election or $14,000 total.
There's some irony here. Under the bill as it now stands, the guy in Natrona County could give $7,000 personally to a county commission candidate and another $7,000 through his PAC. The Legislature wants to plug an $11,000 loophole with a $14,000 cork.
Worse, a really rich contributor could give that amount of money to as many candidates as he or she chooses, because the proposed bill eliminates the $25,000 overall limit on any one individual's contributions during a cycle. There's no way that this bill keeps the playing field relatively level for grassroots candidates.
Call to action
Please contact your state senator and ask them either to reduce the limits or kill the bill. We hope an amendment will be offered on third reading tomorrow that will propose raising state contribution limits for both individuals and state PACs to the federal limit on personal contributions: $2,300 per election. (Considerably less than the $3,500 now in the bill.)
Please suggest to your legislator that he or she should protect Wyoming's election process from the corrosive effects of the far-too-high limits in the bill now.
Those arguing for the $3,500 limits maintain that the hike is justified because of inflation. That argument dismisses the political realities in Wyoming, where the average winning campaign in the 2006 general election cost about $11.700. The ESPC believes the limits should be more in proportion to the cost of campaigns in Wyoming, not campaigns conducted in Texas, New York, or California.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Campaign finance in the morning
Senate Corporations Committee hears campaign finance bills Tuesday
We'll take our effort to plug the PAC loophole in state campaign finance law to the Senate Corporations Committee Tuesday morning at 8 a.m.
If you've been tracking these bills -- House Bill 3 Campaign Finance - electronic filing and House Bill 9 - Campaign Finance -- you know they bring to mind the old axiom about being careful about what you ask for. We wanted campaign financing on the Joint Corporations Committee's 2007 interim work list because we saw a loophole exploited in 2006.
Casper developer Mickey McMurry set up a Political Action Committee called the Committee to Elect Natrona County Candidates, to which he was the sole contributor. He put about $11,575 in it, then gave roughly $11,200 to Barb Peryam to finance her campaign for a seat on the Natrona County Commission. She won with a well-funded media campaign that included billboards all over Casper.
The PAC enabled McMurry to avoid the $1,000 per election limit on individual contributions. The move was completely legal and was accurately reported in the PAC's required contributions and expenditure report.
The Legislature's leadership recognized the loophole and agreed to put the law on the interim work list. The committee took it up and imposed limits on PACs of $3,500 per election, a figure further reduced via amendments last week in the House to $2,300 for all but statewide campaigns. The limit there is $4,600 per election.
Unfortunately, the interim committee decided to increase the individual campaign contribution limit to $3,500 per election, or $7,000 for the election cycle. The majority of the committee reasoned that the limit has not been raised since the mid-1970s so asserted that an inflation adjustment is in order. (Too bad they don't bring the same reasoning to the state's minimum wage. Oh, well.)
Worse, the interim committee eliminated the overall individual limit of $25,000.
Research by the ESPC's Sarah Gorin revealed that on average, it cost about $11,000 to $12,000 in 2006 to win a contested legislative campaign. The proposed contribution limit is out of proportion to these costs. Just three or four people could fund a winning campaign.
Campaigns for the governorship recently have cost about $1 million. The new limit would enable candidates for governor to shrink their pool of contributors substantially.
During debate in the House, opponents of the higher limits warned about public cynicism toward the role of money in politics and worried about its corrosive effects. The state should be moving toward broader funding of its politics, not making it possible for a few financially-able individuals to dominate the process.
The irony here is that under the proposed higher limits, the situation in Natrona County could repeat itself under the new law. The Committee to Elect Natrona County Candidates could contribute $4,600 to a single candidate. Combine that with the $7,000 that its principal could give in an election cycle and there it is: $11,600 to a single candidate from a single person.
We'll offer amendments Tuesday morning to restore the old limits. We'll also propose a second amendment to remove a House-approved provision that exempts some large contributions made within a week of election day from timely reporting requirements. The exemption applies if the contribution comes from the candidate or from his or her immediate family. In the last week of a campaign, the law should require reporting of any contribution of $1,000 or more within one business day.
HB 3 - Campaign Finance - Electronic filing
This idea is made for a large state like Wyoming where most voters live many miles away from the Capitol, where the written reports are now sent. The bill will require all candidates to file contribution and expenditure reports electronically, beginning in 2010. The information will go into a searchable database managed by the Secretary of State. Anyone with an internet connection will be able to access the information and determine who their favorite -- and most hated -- organizations are supporting.
The measure serves both the need for transparency and accountability in the political process.
As things stand now, campaign spending reports are muddled, with candidates committing various, very human errors in arithmetic, transposing numbers, skipping entries, etc. Our own research efforts found some reports simply impossible to straighten out so they made sense.
Secretary of State Max Maxfield, deputy Pat Arp and Elections Director Peggy Nighswonger deserve high praise for preparing and supporting this bill.
We'll take our effort to plug the PAC loophole in state campaign finance law to the Senate Corporations Committee Tuesday morning at 8 a.m.
If you've been tracking these bills -- House Bill 3 Campaign Finance - electronic filing and House Bill 9 - Campaign Finance -- you know they bring to mind the old axiom about being careful about what you ask for. We wanted campaign financing on the Joint Corporations Committee's 2007 interim work list because we saw a loophole exploited in 2006.
Casper developer Mickey McMurry set up a Political Action Committee called the Committee to Elect Natrona County Candidates, to which he was the sole contributor. He put about $11,575 in it, then gave roughly $11,200 to Barb Peryam to finance her campaign for a seat on the Natrona County Commission. She won with a well-funded media campaign that included billboards all over Casper.
The PAC enabled McMurry to avoid the $1,000 per election limit on individual contributions. The move was completely legal and was accurately reported in the PAC's required contributions and expenditure report.
The Legislature's leadership recognized the loophole and agreed to put the law on the interim work list. The committee took it up and imposed limits on PACs of $3,500 per election, a figure further reduced via amendments last week in the House to $2,300 for all but statewide campaigns. The limit there is $4,600 per election.
Unfortunately, the interim committee decided to increase the individual campaign contribution limit to $3,500 per election, or $7,000 for the election cycle. The majority of the committee reasoned that the limit has not been raised since the mid-1970s so asserted that an inflation adjustment is in order. (Too bad they don't bring the same reasoning to the state's minimum wage. Oh, well.)
Worse, the interim committee eliminated the overall individual limit of $25,000.
Research by the ESPC's Sarah Gorin revealed that on average, it cost about $11,000 to $12,000 in 2006 to win a contested legislative campaign. The proposed contribution limit is out of proportion to these costs. Just three or four people could fund a winning campaign.
Campaigns for the governorship recently have cost about $1 million. The new limit would enable candidates for governor to shrink their pool of contributors substantially.
During debate in the House, opponents of the higher limits warned about public cynicism toward the role of money in politics and worried about its corrosive effects. The state should be moving toward broader funding of its politics, not making it possible for a few financially-able individuals to dominate the process.
The irony here is that under the proposed higher limits, the situation in Natrona County could repeat itself under the new law. The Committee to Elect Natrona County Candidates could contribute $4,600 to a single candidate. Combine that with the $7,000 that its principal could give in an election cycle and there it is: $11,600 to a single candidate from a single person.
We'll offer amendments Tuesday morning to restore the old limits. We'll also propose a second amendment to remove a House-approved provision that exempts some large contributions made within a week of election day from timely reporting requirements. The exemption applies if the contribution comes from the candidate or from his or her immediate family. In the last week of a campaign, the law should require reporting of any contribution of $1,000 or more within one business day.
HB 3 - Campaign Finance - Electronic filing
This idea is made for a large state like Wyoming where most voters live many miles away from the Capitol, where the written reports are now sent. The bill will require all candidates to file contribution and expenditure reports electronically, beginning in 2010. The information will go into a searchable database managed by the Secretary of State. Anyone with an internet connection will be able to access the information and determine who their favorite -- and most hated -- organizations are supporting.
The measure serves both the need for transparency and accountability in the political process.
As things stand now, campaign spending reports are muddled, with candidates committing various, very human errors in arithmetic, transposing numbers, skipping entries, etc. Our own research efforts found some reports simply impossible to straighten out so they made sense.
Secretary of State Max Maxfield, deputy Pat Arp and Elections Director Peggy Nighswonger deserve high praise for preparing and supporting this bill.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Working on Workers' Comp
Injured workers deserve fair, just compensation
We're been working with the AFL-CIO and the Wyoming Trial Lawyers' Association to raise awareness of problems with the state Workers' Compensation system.
We staged a forum in Casper last month and another in Cheyenne Wednesday night.
Here's the joint news release from the Cheyenne event.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Immediate Release February 21, 2008
Contact:
George Santini Dan Neal
Cheyenne Attorney Equality State Policy Center
307-632-8957 (307) 258-2783
Kim Floyd
AFL-CIO
(307) 635-2823
STATE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SYSTEM IS BROKEN
FORUM EXPOSES FLAWS IN SYSTEM
Workers, Labor Leaders, Trial Attorneys and Worker Advocates Demand Changes Needed to Better Protect Workers and their Families
(Cheyenne, February 21, 2008)—The State Workers’ Compensation law must be reformed to ensure that injured workers receive the benefits they need, especially after accidents that leave them permanently or temporarily totally disabled, a coalition of advocates for working families contend.
In a forum in Cheyenne Wednesday night, labor leaders, Wyoming workers and their families, trial attorneys and others heard injured workers such as Richard Johnson now of Grantsville, Utah outline a litany of abuses they’ve suffered at the hands of the Workers’ Compensation Division.
Johnson, who has had eight back surgeries since being injured on an oil drilling rig more than 20 years ago, said the division has made his life miserable. Among other complaints, Johnson noted the division has sent him letters informing him he is no longer considered disabled “because my wife can work. Get that — because my wife can work.”
Wednesday’s forum was the second in a series sponsored by the Wyoming State AFL-CIO, the Equality State Policy Center and the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association.
“The system seems able to deal with ordinary injuries but it is tougher on people who are disabled in a job accident,” stated Dan Neal, Executive Director of the Equality State Policy Center. “The system owes injured workers efficient access to medical care and should fairly compensate people who suffer temporary or permanent disability.”
Wyoming State AFL-CIO Executive Secretary Kim noted that many injured workers experience delays in health benefit coverage, unfair examination of claims and long delays in treatment. “They often need legal assistance simply to negotiate a very difficult bureaucratic process,” he said.
“We’ve got to demand change,” Floyd told the group. Those changes must acknowledge that workers carry Wyoming’s boom-time economy on their backs and deserve just and fair compensation if they’re injured on the job.
Among the changes proposed by Floyd:
1. Revise the definition of permanent total and permanent partial disability to reflect actual work life expectancy.
2. Increase the maximum weekly benefit for permanent total disability to at least two-thirds of the employee’s average weekly wage.
3. Pay total disability benefits for the duration of the worker’s disability, or for life, without any limitations on dollar amount or time.
4. Restore the right to compensation for mental stress or trauma.
5. The 44-month limit on permanent partial impairment payments should be restored to at least the former 60-month limit with improved benefits.
6. Provide vocation rehabilitation designed to restore the employee to his or her per-injury earning capacity.
Jackson attorney Mel Orchard urged people to “take back their democracy” and demand that legislators provide just benefits to people injured while creating wealth for their employers and the state. Those especially concerned should consider running for office in the coming elections,” he said.
“As attorneys we work to ensure that deserving individuals have access to justice, even when taking on the most powerful interests. We often hear complaints about unfair treatment by Workers’ Comp and personally witness the inadequacy of the current system,” stated Larry Clapp, a Casper attorney who is President of the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association.
“We want to work with legislators and other interested organizations to make sure the system works,” concluded Clapp.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporters: To obtain an interview with an injured worker like Richard Johnson, please contact the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association at 307-635-0820.
We're been working with the AFL-CIO and the Wyoming Trial Lawyers' Association to raise awareness of problems with the state Workers' Compensation system.
We staged a forum in Casper last month and another in Cheyenne Wednesday night.
Here's the joint news release from the Cheyenne event.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Immediate Release February 21, 2008
Contact:
George Santini Dan Neal
Cheyenne Attorney Equality State Policy Center
307-632-8957 (307) 258-2783
Kim Floyd
AFL-CIO
(307) 635-2823
STATE WORKERS’ COMPENSATION SYSTEM IS BROKEN
FORUM EXPOSES FLAWS IN SYSTEM
Workers, Labor Leaders, Trial Attorneys and Worker Advocates Demand Changes Needed to Better Protect Workers and their Families
(Cheyenne, February 21, 2008)—The State Workers’ Compensation law must be reformed to ensure that injured workers receive the benefits they need, especially after accidents that leave them permanently or temporarily totally disabled, a coalition of advocates for working families contend.
In a forum in Cheyenne Wednesday night, labor leaders, Wyoming workers and their families, trial attorneys and others heard injured workers such as Richard Johnson now of Grantsville, Utah outline a litany of abuses they’ve suffered at the hands of the Workers’ Compensation Division.
Johnson, who has had eight back surgeries since being injured on an oil drilling rig more than 20 years ago, said the division has made his life miserable. Among other complaints, Johnson noted the division has sent him letters informing him he is no longer considered disabled “because my wife can work. Get that — because my wife can work.”
Wednesday’s forum was the second in a series sponsored by the Wyoming State AFL-CIO, the Equality State Policy Center and the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association.
“The system seems able to deal with ordinary injuries but it is tougher on people who are disabled in a job accident,” stated Dan Neal, Executive Director of the Equality State Policy Center. “The system owes injured workers efficient access to medical care and should fairly compensate people who suffer temporary or permanent disability.”
Wyoming State AFL-CIO Executive Secretary Kim noted that many injured workers experience delays in health benefit coverage, unfair examination of claims and long delays in treatment. “They often need legal assistance simply to negotiate a very difficult bureaucratic process,” he said.
“We’ve got to demand change,” Floyd told the group. Those changes must acknowledge that workers carry Wyoming’s boom-time economy on their backs and deserve just and fair compensation if they’re injured on the job.
Among the changes proposed by Floyd:
1. Revise the definition of permanent total and permanent partial disability to reflect actual work life expectancy.
2. Increase the maximum weekly benefit for permanent total disability to at least two-thirds of the employee’s average weekly wage.
3. Pay total disability benefits for the duration of the worker’s disability, or for life, without any limitations on dollar amount or time.
4. Restore the right to compensation for mental stress or trauma.
5. The 44-month limit on permanent partial impairment payments should be restored to at least the former 60-month limit with improved benefits.
6. Provide vocation rehabilitation designed to restore the employee to his or her per-injury earning capacity.
Jackson attorney Mel Orchard urged people to “take back their democracy” and demand that legislators provide just benefits to people injured while creating wealth for their employers and the state. Those especially concerned should consider running for office in the coming elections,” he said.
“As attorneys we work to ensure that deserving individuals have access to justice, even when taking on the most powerful interests. We often hear complaints about unfair treatment by Workers’ Comp and personally witness the inadequacy of the current system,” stated Larry Clapp, a Casper attorney who is President of the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association.
“We want to work with legislators and other interested organizations to make sure the system works,” concluded Clapp.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporters: To obtain an interview with an injured worker like Richard Johnson, please contact the Wyoming Trial Lawyers Association at 307-635-0820.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Helium tax rises
Revenue Committee votes 8-1 to tax helium
The industry lobbyists came out in force Wednesday trying to throw sand and gravel in the way of a severance tax on helium. It was tempting to take a helium-filled balloon into the committee room and huff it so I could testify in full helium voice. We could have used a little morning humor.
Exxon's attorney Patrick Day complained that the tax singles out his company since its the only outfit producing helium in Wyoming today. Exxon strips helium produced from its gas wells during processing at its big plant near Shute Creek. He gently, a number of times, outlined the likelihood of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the tax. Angling for a delay that could save his company around $3 million, he asked for an interim study to consider the complexities of the matter.
But he was just one of the many industry reps in the room. The Petroleum Association of Wyoming sent Bruce Hinchey, a former House speaker, to read a letter from Peter Wold, president of a Casper-based producer. Wold asked the committee not to rush the new tax.
Questar's lobbyists said the company had considered a gas processing plant and found it economically infeasible. If its analysis had been required to account for a severance tax on helium, the idea would have been even more risky, really risky.
Show us the money
The Revenue Department held its ground, though and Craig Grenvik assured the committee that lawsuits are simply a part of everyday life in his world.
The committee withstood the industry barrage and kept its focus on the state's constitutional requirement of a severance tax levy on valuable minerals produced in the state. Reps. Tom Lubnau, Tim Stubson, Mark Semlek and Chairman Rodney Pete Anderson stuck to the basic principal that if a mineral comes out of the ground in Wyoming, the state expects to recover some of the value in tax revenues.
No doubt some of the resolution the committee displayed derived from the public shaming Gov. Dave Freudenthal subjected them to earlier this month after they declined to advance the helium tax bill and then dumped the governor's property tax relief proposal to help senior citizens. The governor essentially called it a $3 million tax break for Big Oil and a stick in the eye for seniors. Dave can cut to the quick sometimes.
These companies are making millions in Wyoming producing the minerals that bless this wind-swept place. If we get to that interim study, it should include a long, hard look at the question of whether the state is getting its fair share of the value when it levies a severance tax of a measly 6 percent. When you see the number of industry lobbyists and witness the skills they wield to pressure Wyoming legislators, the reason for such a low tax rate becomes clear.
Electronic filing and campaign finance
The House gave final approval to House Bill 3 - Electronic Filing Wednesday. The bill moves to the Senate.
It follows House Bill 9 - Campaign Finance, the bill that limits state PAC contributions and more than triples the individual contributions limit.
The industry lobbyists came out in force Wednesday trying to throw sand and gravel in the way of a severance tax on helium. It was tempting to take a helium-filled balloon into the committee room and huff it so I could testify in full helium voice. We could have used a little morning humor.
Exxon's attorney Patrick Day complained that the tax singles out his company since its the only outfit producing helium in Wyoming today. Exxon strips helium produced from its gas wells during processing at its big plant near Shute Creek. He gently, a number of times, outlined the likelihood of a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the tax. Angling for a delay that could save his company around $3 million, he asked for an interim study to consider the complexities of the matter.
But he was just one of the many industry reps in the room. The Petroleum Association of Wyoming sent Bruce Hinchey, a former House speaker, to read a letter from Peter Wold, president of a Casper-based producer. Wold asked the committee not to rush the new tax.
Questar's lobbyists said the company had considered a gas processing plant and found it economically infeasible. If its analysis had been required to account for a severance tax on helium, the idea would have been even more risky, really risky.
Show us the money
The Revenue Department held its ground, though and Craig Grenvik assured the committee that lawsuits are simply a part of everyday life in his world.
The committee withstood the industry barrage and kept its focus on the state's constitutional requirement of a severance tax levy on valuable minerals produced in the state. Reps. Tom Lubnau, Tim Stubson, Mark Semlek and Chairman Rodney Pete Anderson stuck to the basic principal that if a mineral comes out of the ground in Wyoming, the state expects to recover some of the value in tax revenues.
No doubt some of the resolution the committee displayed derived from the public shaming Gov. Dave Freudenthal subjected them to earlier this month after they declined to advance the helium tax bill and then dumped the governor's property tax relief proposal to help senior citizens. The governor essentially called it a $3 million tax break for Big Oil and a stick in the eye for seniors. Dave can cut to the quick sometimes.
These companies are making millions in Wyoming producing the minerals that bless this wind-swept place. If we get to that interim study, it should include a long, hard look at the question of whether the state is getting its fair share of the value when it levies a severance tax of a measly 6 percent. When you see the number of industry lobbyists and witness the skills they wield to pressure Wyoming legislators, the reason for such a low tax rate becomes clear.
Electronic filing and campaign finance
The House gave final approval to House Bill 3 - Electronic Filing Wednesday. The bill moves to the Senate.
It follows House Bill 9 - Campaign Finance, the bill that limits state PAC contributions and more than triples the individual contributions limit.
Headway on filing
In turnaound, House votes to make filing universal
Feb. 20, 2008 - The House voted Tuesday to remove an amendment from House Bill 3 that made compliance with electronic filing requirements voluntary.
In one of those moves that reminds you that the Wyoming Legislature can sometimes stand up and do the right thing, the House voted to remove an amendment that weakened this bill. Now all candidates running in 2010 will have to file electronically. The move means contribution and spending information filed by candidates will be part of a searchable database that voters across Wyoming can use to see who is supporting state politicians.
Somehow, fears of a mandatory system evaporated. The vote is one that's good for state politics.
Feb. 20, 2008 - The House voted Tuesday to remove an amendment from House Bill 3 that made compliance with electronic filing requirements voluntary.
In one of those moves that reminds you that the Wyoming Legislature can sometimes stand up and do the right thing, the House voted to remove an amendment that weakened this bill. Now all candidates running in 2010 will have to file electronically. The move means contribution and spending information filed by candidates will be part of a searchable database that voters across Wyoming can use to see who is supporting state politicians.
Somehow, fears of a mandatory system evaporated. The vote is one that's good for state politics.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Showing the money
Fun with campaign finance
Tuesday, Feb. 19 - Yesterday the House approved a campaign finance bill that threatens to flood state elections with more money. At best, it means that a legislative candidate could obtain the funds to run a winning campaign in a contested race with as few as two or three contributors backing her.
Contributors would be allowed to give up to $7,000 to the candidate of their choice. The bill in the House, as presently written, opens the door so wide that any very wealthy political contributor could pump an unlimited amount of dough into state and local campaigns. That's right. Pick your multi-millionaire - there will be no limit on the amount of money they can spend to elect candidates in Wyoming.
Wyoming’s current campaign contribution law allows individuals to contribute $1000 per candidate per election. The primary and general elections are considered separate elections, so, in effect, an individual can contribute up to $2000 to a candidate in an election year. The current law also sets an overall limit of $25,000 for contributions from any one individual.
While a significant number of contributors “limit out” in a typical governor’s race, $1000 contributions are relatively rare in legislative races, and no single contributor has pushed the $25,000 limit.
The current law imposes no limits on contributions from state political action committees (PACs). (Federal PACs face federal limits.) In 2006, Natrona County philanthropist Micky McMurry formed a PAC and used it to funnel about $11,600 to a candidate for the Natrona County Commission. In a completely legal move, he used a PAC to give more to a candidate than was allowed under the individual limit.
Citing the loophole diving in Natrona County, the ESPC asked the Legislature to consider putting contribution limits on state PACs.
This duly occurred during the 2007 interim (the time between legislative sessions, when committees meet to study legislation). Unfortunately, the Joint Interim Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Committee decided not only to plug the PAC loophole, but also to raise the individual contribution limits substantially – from $1000 per candidate per election to $3500 per candidate per election.
The ESPC opposed this move. We believe that it is better for a candidate to raise less money (apiece) from more people than to raise more money from fewer people. Raising contribution limits likely will have the effect of shrinking the pool of people contributing to campaigns, which already is relatively small. It also will feed public cynicism about the influence of money in politics.
These arguments were largely ignored and the bill passed the House yesterday with the individual limit of $3500 per candidate per election. The majority of members also approved an amendment lowering the proposed PAC contribution limit from $3500 per candidate per election ($7000 per candidate per election for statewide races) to $2300 per candidate per election.
Ironically, this combination of individual and PAC limits will allow Mr. McMurry, who set this train in motion with his PAC ruse in 2006, to give the same amount of money he gave before, this time without having to circumvent any limits. How, you ask? He can contribute $7,000 individually and use the PAC to send another $4,600 to the candidate of his choice - nearly exactly the amount he poured into the Natrona County Commission race in 2006.
The committee's main justification for hiking the individual contribution limits was "inflation." We can only hope that legislators are as concerned about inflation when it comes to something like the minimum wage for tipped employees, set at $2.30/hour since heaven knows when.
Electronic filing - an idea made for a big, square state
A number of legislators feel limits are unnecessary as long as there is transparency. This is the subject of HB 3, electronic filing, which would require candidates to electronically file their contribution and expenditure reports, and create a searchable database from these reports (beginning in the 2010 election year).
HB 3 took ahit yesterday with the addition of an amendment making electronic filing optional rather than mandatory. Proponents say the Secretary of State can scan paper report and post a pdf of the filing on the Internet. While better than the current system, those reports will not be part of the searchable database.
Once a system is established, however, we believe most candidates will choose to file electronically. Other states’ experiences indicate that candidates don’t want to appear inept or obstructive.
Certainly the current system of paper reports provides little transparency. Some are barely readable; others contain math errors and other inconsistencies. One has to be in Cheyenne to get to them, or request (and pay for) copies and mailing. The Secretary of State's office has strongly advocated moving to an electronic filing system to get Wyoming out of the accountability basement among the 50 states.
Please contact your legislator and ask for support of HB 3. We'd love to see the system require participation by all candidates, but we'll take as much as we can get this year.
Healthcare pilot project
We told the Senate Labor, Health and Social Services Committee that we have a few questions about Senate File 85. The measure sets up a pilot project that proponents believe will, as they say in the business world, "incentiveize" low income people to live more healthy lifestyles. It's a good objective but the idea has not been analyzed by the Wyoming Healthcare Commission or the Department of Health. We wonder why.
Here are the questions that concern us most:
1. How will setting up a new, separate structure affect administrative costs? (One of the goals of reform is to reduce administrative costs.) For example, how will bills be processed and paid?
2. The bill outlines the groups of people to be given priority for participation. Will participation be completely voluntary?
3. The “administrator” of the pilot holds considerable power. If the administrator decides to “decline to offer … or limit these [clinical prevention] services to those who is his judgment will not benefit from them,” what recourse is available to the patient?
4. The program can withhold the state payments into the health service account if clients fail to comply with “specific preventative requirements.” Who decides this? What recourse is available to a family that finds itself in this situation?
5. The bill does not specify the qualifications for members of the benefit design committee. Sen. Charles Scott said Tuesday he has chosen to “trust the governor.” The governor apparently plans to name Hank Gardner of the University of Wyoming, Wendy Curran of his office, and Rick Schum of Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
6. What limits are imposed on healthcare providers serving the program? How will those costs be controlled?
7. Poor people live complicated lives (like all of us) but they are teetering at the poverty line. The state will need to find motivated people to participate in a study that asks them to change lifestyles and give up some unhealthy habits such as smoking. The bill allows the administrator to drop people from the program in order to control costs. What insurance company would not love the opportunity to walk away from its insurance contracts? Won’t the fact that they can be dis-enrolled discourage people from participating in the program?
8. Why is the state poaching money from the KidCare CHIP expansion to pay for this? Sure, the state has not obtained a needed waiver from the feds managing the program (funded via Medicaid). But the waiver applies only to the federal Medicaid funds. The state could decide simply to fund the expansion itself – or a significant portion of it. Why not use the state funds to advance that program?
9. Why are we pondering a significant new project without running it through the Wyoming Healthcare Commission for a detailed evaluation? Was the proposal vetted by the Department of Health or the College of Health Sciences at UW?
Monday, February 11, 2008
Governor pushes new energy approach
People concerned about jobs, housing, health care
Governor Dave Freudenthal today launched the 2008 Budget session with a State of the State message that exhorted legislators to meet funding commitments already made, but avoid expanding spending.
And in a bit of candor, the governor said Wyoming citizens have the uneasy sense that the state’s leaders aren’t concerned about the same things the people are — housing, jobs and the cost of living, health care, and protection of the environment.
The governor said his proposal for meeting the state’s obligations over the coming biennium includes “not a single budget cut.” That’s a point that sounds good until we understand which programs, particularly human services, must try to get by with very small or no increase in revenue. Failure to grow in Wyoming’s current economy — with the cost of living up seemingly up across the board — is the same as a budget cut when meeting the needs of the same number of people.
In the speech, the governor noted that the state has increased its savings rate to $.40 of every severance tax dollar while providing ample funding to education. Legislators applaued the comment about education funding. They have worked for years to meet a Wyoming Supreme Court mandate to assure that every child in the state has access to a decent education.
Healthcare surprise
A pilot health care project centered around a public/private partnership involving state government, working families, and employers will be supported by the governor. He offered few details other than to say it will emphasize personal responsibility and targets funding already set aside to expand the KidCare CHIP program. The idea surprised the Wyoming Healthcare Commission, which was not asked to review the idea proposed by Natrona County state Sen. Charles Scott.
How the commission views this development remains in question. It is too bad to see a volunteer board that has worked hard to develop considerable expertise in healthcare circumvented by legislators working behind the scenes. Perhaps for that reason, the governor went out of his way to commend the work of the commission, which will have several bills before the House Labor, Health and Social Services Committee later today. (These are House bills 31, 38, and 47.)
The governor did not brief the commission about his plans to support the pilot project. The measure apparently will start in the Senate where it will go to the Senate Labor, Health and Social Services Committee. Funding could come from the money set aside to expand the KidCare CHIP program to extend insurance coverage to the parents of children whose very low family income qualified them for the program.
The ESPC supported the KidCare program expansion. That expansion has been delayed by the state’s inability to get the federal government’s approval for spending federal Medicaid funds to extend the insurance to parents. Too bad such a good idea got caught up in the fight between President Bush and the Congress over reauthorizing the KidCare program. Now it’s worrisome to see the state funds already appropriated for the program targeted 3for other uses.
Energy – a dose of conservation
Conservation of energy got a boost from the governor. Freudenthal noted that governments at all levels are paying and will pay more for energy. The best way to control these costs, he said, is to be more efficient.
Perhaps we’ll see greater support for green building requirements on public buildings following this conservation initiative. A Monday press release from the Governor’s Office noted that he “emphasized that state government must recognize that the marketplace for energy is changing, and should become more energy efficient in government buildings. He also asked the Legislature to consider allowing the State Loan and Investment Board to use a portion of local government money to encourage energy efficiency, and to authorize $500,000 in funding for energy audits for local governments.”
This welcome rhetoric continued with governor’s advice that we all need to take seriously our stewardship responsibility to the earth and to Wyoming.
The state will have to transition to carbon-constrained environment, the governor conceded, because the “boys with the money have set the rules,“ — the nation’s financial institutions are no longer so excited about funding conventional coal-fired electrical generation.
To help sustain Wyoming’s fossil-fuels-based economy, the governor asked for favorable consideration of the Judiciary Committee’s carbon management bills. This legislation will establish the legal framework needed to develop a carbon sequestration program in the state.
“Talking about planning for growth in Wyoming will require all state residents to set aside their traditional values and stereotypes, and to talk honestly about what Wyoming can be in the future,” the governor’s press release noted. He said he supports a measure to limit subdivisions. Senate File 11 would grant counties the option to regulate subdivisions with lots greater than 35 acres (up to 140 acres). Echoing comments from his own planning conference last month, Freudenthal pointed out that rural subdivisions often fail to pay all the costs of their development and instead ask the public to finance water, roads, and fire protection with money from the state or counties. Go ahead and use your property rights, but pay for it yourself, was his message.
Taxes
The governor renewed his call for property tax relief for elderly residents. He said there should be no means testing because people at that age are too proud to come in with tax returns. He also supports a Revenue Committee bill to value sour gas for tax purposes, a measure the ESPC also supports. And he expressed support for a Department of Revenue proposal to use two methods of allocating sales tax revenues to local governments to recognize that some areas lost more with repeal of sales tax on groceries than others.
Accountability
We’re pleased to relay the governor’s observation that learned two main things at his planning conference last month:
(1) people want solutions to come from the bottom up;
(2) they are worried about what lawmakers are thinking about the future – lawmakers’ concerns are not theirs, i.e., people are concerned about affordable housing, environmental protection, health care, and jobs.
The governor said he plans to bring his “Envision Wyoming” project to the legislature before the end of the session.
And speaking from what could have been an ESPC script, the governor said that the public is concerned not so much with the content of decisions, but HOW THEY ARE MADE.
Prayer Service
Speaking of poverty and the poor, the Wyoming Association of Churches again sponsored the Legislative Prayer Service in the Capitol Rotunda. The association has staged the ecumenical services in the past to urge legislators, who so often have their ears bent by the rich and powerful, to remember the poor.
Scheduled participants in today’s service included the Rev.Rebekah Simon-Peter Of Bridgeworks in Rawlins, the Rev. Tim Trippel of Worland, Re. Warren Murphy of Cody, and the Rev. Robert Schmidt of Cheyenne. Several legislators were set to take part including Rep. Rosie Berger of Big Horn, Rep. Bernadine Craft of Rock Springs, Rep. Pat Goggles of Ethete and Sen. Robert Fecht of Cheyenne.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
