Missouri's 11-year-old ethics law not functioning properly

JEFFERSON CITY - A reform law sponsors claimed more than 11 years ago would create new ethical standards for statewide political candidates, lobbyists and elected officials has repeatedly faced major hurdles ranging from non-functioning computer systems to delayed decisions by those chosen to serve on a six-member, bipartisan citizens' commission.

Enacted in 1991, the Missouri Ethics Law provided for the creation of an oversight commission and the establishment of a permanent agency in the state's Office of Administration empowered to compile mandatory campaign-spending reports as well as all expenditures made by lobbyists on behalf of their clients.

Although numerous passages of the law have been judged to be either confusing or inconsistent, the measure set specific deadlines for the start-up of electronic reporting systems for both state political candidates and lobbyists. Neither of these mandated systems has since met the statutory effective dates, due principally to the failure of an electronic reporting system, later abandoned, which cost taxpayers more than $472,000 in software alone.

The law creating the Missouri Ethics Commission, required that a lobbyist reporting system should be in place by Jan. 1, 1998, thereby providing the public with this data on an Internet web site no later than Jan. 1, 1999. These deadlines were not met, with the reporting system not finally operational until October 1999, and the Internet web site not established until December 2000.

The law's deadline for campaign finance disclosure was even further off the mark, mandated in time for the 1998 elections. Since this electronic equipment was not operational until November 2001, the 1998 election deadline was never met - or even attempted - and information was not available for use until April 15 of this year, thus missing the reporting deadline for both the election of 1998 and 2000.

Equipment failures and the MEC's rejection of the system software installed by the contractor brought a commission decision that ultimately led to lawsuits against the vending company. After settlement of the lawsuits, the commission continued to express dissatisfaction with the systems, claiming they were not functioning properly.

As a result, the commission decided to scrap the vendor's systems and develop suitable ones in-house.

Auditor delivers report

A report by State Auditor Claire McCaskill has questioned the commission's decision not to implement an electronic reporting system for personal financial disclosure reports by statewide officials. Relying on counsel, the commission has responded by contending the 1991 law does not require such personal data but has agreed to ask the office of Attorney General for a ruling.

The commission's decision to devise its own reporting system does not allow users functionality similar to other state web sites. The lobbyist system only allows users to access a list of lobbyist expenditures made for or on behalf of certain state elected officials only. Reporting systems in other states allow searches based on user-defined criteria and the ability to sort, summarize and download information from available software.

Vague legislation

According to a commission spokesman, MEC's enforcement authority is often limited or non-existent because enabling legislation has often proved to be vague, confusing and contains numerous exceptions to various reporting requirements. MEC has thus far pursued no statutory changes to ensure the laws include appropriate enforcement provisions.

The MEC did not assess penalties for late filings of monthly lobbyist expenditures form Jan. 1, 1998 through Jan. 31, 2001. In addition, the MEC has not assessed penalties for late campaign finance disclosure reports since 1997.

The 1991 statute also requires the MEC to review and audit lobbyists reports, campaign finance disclosure reports and personal financial disclosure statements. However, MEC audits are not automatically carried out unless a complaint is filed under the law.

Expenditures for the Ethics Commission totaled $1.4 million in FY 2001, with salaries making up $812,037 of the total. The six-member oversight commission, whose members are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate, are paid $100 per diem.