House-altered ethics bill destined to die in Senate
Both chambers vow they won’t budge on dark money disclosures
AUSTIN — Comprehensive ethics reform spurred by Gov. Greg Abbott could be torpedoed over a controversial campaign finance issue: requiring politically active nonprofits to reveal their donors.
For the second consecutive legislative session, disclosure of donors behind so-called “dark money” groups has surfaced as a key topic in the ethics reform debate for lawmakers frustrated with attacks paid for with secret donor cash.
Nonprofits are allowed to spend unlimited sums on TV ads, mailers and other electioneering tools, but do not have to disclose their financial backers.
A top House lawmaker, however, slapped an amendment to require dark money disclosure on what has been dubbed the most comprehensive ethics bill in decades. The measure won final approval in the House on Wednesday, but Senate leaders have opposed the idea of forcing politically active nonprofits to report donors.
The sweeping ethics bill, authored by Sen. Van Taylor, R-Plano, now heads back to the Senate, where lawmakers approved a vastly different version last month and are all but certain to reject changes made by the House.
That leaves an array of big differences between the House and Senate proposals that need to be hashed out by a conference committee with little time left before the session ends on June 1.
And there appears to be
no compromise in sight on the lighting rod that is dark money disclosure.
On Wednesday, Rep. Byron Cook, a Republican from Corsicana who sponsored the ethics bill in the House, made clear the lower chamber does not intend to budge on the issue.
“That is one of the signature pieces of any ethics legislation,” said Cook, noting that more than 120 House members supported a stand-alone of dark money disclosure bill.
Asked if the House would be willing to bargain with the Senate on dark money, Cook responded sharply: “No.”
The Senate author was just as adamant in an interview Wednesday. Taylor, who was tapped by Abbott to carry his signature ethics proposals for the session, said the upper chamber will not agree to send a bill to Abbott that includes a dark money provision.
“No chance,” he said. “Anonymous political speech absolutely must be something we protect.”
He added, “I’m going to work on the common ground that we’ve established and try to put together something that will pass that both houses … and send it to the governor’s desk.”
The ethics bill expands personal financial reporting requirements for lawmakers and state officials, seeks to tighten conflicts of interest involving lawmakers and would require the disclosure of contracts worth more than $10,000 per year between elected officials and governmental entities.
Dark money has become the most controversial component. It would require groups making independent expenditures of $25,000 or more to disclose the names of donors who give $2,000 or more. State records show a small mix of conservative and liberal entities would fall into that category, based on their expenditures during 2014.
A similar proposal was vetoed last session by Gov. Rick Perry, who said it would chill free speech.
Cook said he is looking for Abbott to take a “position recognizing, if we don’t address dark money one day, this state will have a scandal like other states have had on this issue and we will be addressing it reactively as opposed to proactively.”
That is not likely considering that Abbott, who declared ethics reform an emergency item in January, has said he believes that donor and membership lists are constitutionally protected.
His stance on the Housepassed bill is unknown. His office released a statement when the measure cleared the Senate last month, applauding the ethics reform. But he has remained mum publicly on the House bill.
Commenting on the potential for gridlock between the two chambers on the ethics bill, House Speaker Joe Straus said Wednesday that the lower chamber “will work to find common ground with the Senate on meaningful ethics reform legislation.”