oklahoma oklahoma
play

Oklahoma Oklahoma [ [ Ethics Commission Ethics Commission FY - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oklahoma Oklahoma [ [ Ethics Commission Ethics Commission FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST Oklahoma Constitution Article 2, Oklahoma Constitution Article 2, 1 1 1. Political power - Purpose


  1. Oklahoma Oklahoma [ [ Ethics Commission Ethics Commission FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST FY 2019 BUDGET REQUEST

  2. Oklahoma Constitution Article 2, � Oklahoma Constitution Article 2, � � � � 1 � � � 1 § 1. Political power - Purpose of government - Alteration or § 1. Political power - Purpose of government - Alteration or reformation. reformation. � All political power is inherent in the people; and government is � All political power is inherent in the people; and government is instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and to instituted for their protection, security, and benefit, and to promote their general welfare; and they have the right to alter promote their general welfare; and they have the right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require or reform the same whenever the public good may require it : Provided, such change be not repugnant to the Constitution it : Provided, such change be not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States. of the United States.

  3. Oklahoma laws require disclosure of campaign expenditures 1960’s 1908 Reform movement: supervising political campaign practices and regulating behavior of public officials at state levels 1974 County Commissioner Scandal 1980’s 230 in 60 of 77 counties pled/found Oklahoma Legislature strengthens guilty of corruption Rules in the Campaign Contributions and Expenditures Act of 1974. Governors Nigh and Bellmon respond by seeking a strong Ethics Commission. Oklahoma citizens exercise right to modify structure of state gov’t 1991 & add article 29 to Constitution ensuring an agency dedicated to Constitutional Ethics Commission conduct of state campaigns and state officers and employees. http://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=OK043

  4. ������������������������������������������������� The Oklahoman, John Greiner • Published: June 2, 1989 12:00 AM CDT • Updated: June 2, 1989 12:00 AM CDT June 2, 1989 [Andrew] Tevington proposed that the ethics commission receive an appropriation equal to 5 percent of the total political contributions made to candidates for elective offices during the year of the most recent governor's election. This would give the ethics agency between based on figures from $600,000 and $700,000 the last year in which a governor's race was held, Tevington said. [] The constitutional revision commission finally compromised with language that guarantees the ethics agency an appropriation of at least 5 percent of campaign contributions unless the Legislature, by a two-thirds vote, reduces that amount…

  5. Oklahoma Constitution, Article 29, � Oklahoma Constitution, Article 29, � � �� � � �� � � � � � � � The Ethics Commission shall receive an annual appropriation by the The Ethics Commission shall receive an annual appropriation by the Legislature sufficient to enable it to perform its duties as set forth in Legislature sufficient to enable it to perform its duties as set forth in this Constitutional Amendment . Any funds appropriated to the Ethics this Constitutional Amendment . Any funds appropriated to the Ethics Commission, which remain unspent at the end of the fiscal year shall be Commission, which remain unspent at the end of the fiscal year shall be returned to the general revenue fund. The Commission shall present its returned to the general revenue fund. The Commission shall present its proposed budget to the Governor and the Legislature on the second day of proposed budget to the Governor and the Legislature on the second day of each legislative session. each legislative session.

  6. 1989 Anticipated Funding Level: $600,000-$700,000 28 years later... 2017: Commission funded at $703,000

  7. Comparison: 5% of Contributions (CC Only) v. Actual Appropriation *Does not include contributions to DA or Judicial Races $3,000,000 $2,406,700 $2,500,000 $2,036,732 $2,013,930 $2,000,000 $1,393,687 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $738,129 $703,129 $621,203 $492,277 $482,321 $500,000 $0 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 5% Candidate only Actual www.followthemoney.org

  8. Comparison: 5% of Contributions (CC & Est. PAC), 5% CC, Actual *Does not include contributions to DA or Judicial Races *PAC estimates are 50% of CC contributions (in 2016 races it was 63%) $4,000,000 $3,610,150 $3,373,344 $3,500,000 $3,056,699 $3,000,000 $2,406,700 $2,500,000 $2,090,630 $2,036,732 $2,013,930 $2,000,000 $1,393,687 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $738,129 $703,129 $621,203 $492,277 $482,321 $500,000 $0 2002 2006 2010 2014 2018 5% Contributions 5% Candidate only Actual

  9. Areas of Regulation Areas of Regulation Constitutional Jurisdiction Constitutional Jurisdiction

  10. Constitutional Jurisdiction Constitutional Jurisdiction 1. Campaigns for Elective State Office 2. State Officers and Employees 3. Lobbyists

  11. 335 Elective State Offices 229 416 PACs Candidate Cmte • Governor • Lt. Governor • State Auditor • Supt. Education 782 21 50 • Insurance Cmr IE/EC Entities Special Cmte Committees • 3 Corporation Cmr • 101 House • 48 Senate • 26 District Attorneys 79 11 Out of Party • 75 District Judges state Cmte PACs • 77 Assoc. District Judge • Appellate Courts

  12. 335 Elected Offices 416 229 Candidate PACs Cmte $143,544,281 ~ Contributions 782 50 21 Special 2014-2017 IE/EC Cmts Cmte Entities 79 >10,000 11 Party Out of Filings state Cmte PACs

  13. Lobbyists 608 1,101 Lobbyists Lobbyist & Principals Liaisons 158 38 Legislative Executive Liaisons Lobbyists 315 97 Leg & Legislative Exec Lobbyists Lobbyists

  14. 608 1,101 Lobbyists & Lobbyist $540,759.61 Liaisons Principals Expenditures 38 158 Executive Legislative Lobbyists Liaisons >5,500 315 97 Leg & Exec Legislative Filings Lobbyists Lobbyists

  15. State Officers and Employees ~100 ~35,000 State ~330 Financial Scholarship, Officers and Disclosures Grant reports Employees Filed Filed

  16. Areas of Regulation Areas of Regulation Statutory Jurisdiction Statutory Jurisdiction

  17. Statutory Jurisdiction Over Political Subdivision Limited to Campaign Finance, PFD’s, Forms, & Enforcement >500 Independent ~40 >600 Schools & municipalities County offices Technology Centers Enforcement is discretionary when funded less than $100,000 Currently funded at $0

  18. CONTINUING EDUCATION CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAMS PROGRAMS

  19. Core Programs: • Candidate Committees 57 • PACs • Party Committees • Legislative Liaisons 529 • Lobbyists • State Officers and Employees Programs offered on a rotating quarterly basis. Each program is offered 4 times/year, multiple times during the month

  20. ~100 Scholarship 315 >5,500 >10,000 229 reports Leg/Exec Filed lobbyist PACs committee Lobbyists filings filings 158 Legislative ~330 416 Liaisons 21 PFDs 38 Candidate Filed IE/EC Entities Cmte Executive Only Lobbyists 97 $540,759.61 79 50 57 $143,544,281 Legislative Lobbyist Special Cmte Party CEP ~Contributions Only Lobbyist Principal Cmte Lobbyists Expenditures ~35,000 608 11 State Lobbyists & Officers & Out of state 782 PACs Employees Liaisons Committees 1,101 Lobbyist >600 ~40 >500 County Principals Schools/ cities offices Tech Ctr

  21. 7 57 CEP OEC staff

  22. State Comparison by Population State Comparison by Population

  23. Population Rankings 2010 Census Population Rankings 2010 Census

  24. Jurisdiction Comparison Jurisdiction Comparison Executive Executive Campaign Legislative Legislative Lobbying O/E COI Finance Lobbying O&E COI Other Iowa X X X Connecticut X X X X X X Oklahoma X X X X X X Oregon X X X X Kentucky X X X Louisiana X X X X X

  25. Appropriation and Population Comparison Appropriation and Population Comparison

  26. Oklahoma and 5 States Closest in Population Oklahoma and 5 States Closest in Population Ethics Investment Per Citizen Ethics Investment Per Citizen

  27. Commission 7 Executive Director Director of General Counsel Compliance Compliance Compliance Compliance Executive Assistant Officer Officer Officer

  28. 40

  29. Connecticut: 2 agencies 49

  30. NEW OPEN GOVERNMENT NEW OPEN GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT With New Funding

  31. Open Government Department Open Government Department • Commission has Specific Constitutional Jurisdiction over • Commission has Specific Constitutional Jurisdiction over Conduct of State Officers and Employees Conduct of State Officers and Employees • Open Records and Open Meetings Access Relies on Conduct • Open Records and Open Meetings Access Relies on Conduct of State Officers and Employees of State Officers and Employees • No Legislation necessary—Only Funding • No Legislation necessary—Only Funding • Commission will Promulgate Rules to Provide an Efficient, • Commission will Promulgate Rules to Provide an Efficient, Administrative Process Administrative Process

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend