MIchigan to pass lame-duck bill to let outgoing senators "pocket" campaign funds

[Borealis]

https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2018/11/14/bill-1022-michigan-senators-brandenburg-marleau/1975355002/

LANSING — Two outgoing state senators could pocket more than $92,000 from their campaign funds under legislation on track for passage during the Michigan Legislature’s lame
duck session.

Both Sens. Jack Brandenburg, R-Harrison Township, and Jim Marleau, R-Lake Orion, voted for the legislation that would benefit them when it passed the Senate last week.
Those votes may violate Senate rules against conflict of interest.

Senate Bill 1022, if passed by the House and signed by Gov. Rick Snyder, would allow senators who earlier ran for the House to transfer surplus funds from their Senate campaign
committees to their inactive and cash-poor House committees, in order to pay off old debts.

Such transfers from Senate to House committees are not permitted under current law because Senate committees have significantly higher donor contribution limits than House
committees.

The bill, which passed the Senate on Thursday in a 22-12 vote, included some other minor amendments to Michigan campaign finance law and has been described as legislation
making amendments that are only "technical" in nature.

But it has become known around the Legislature as “the Brandenburg bill.” At least for now, Brandenburg stands to be the primary beneficiary among three senators
affected by the bill. Brandenburg, who is leaving office Dec. 31 and can’t run for the Senate again because of term limits, has a $63,000 balance in his Senate campaign fund but still
owes himself close to $48,000 in loans he made to his House campaign committee a decade ago, before he graduated to the Senate.

He did not respond to phone messages left at his home and his office. Term-limited lawmakers who are leaving office can't keep surplus campaign funds, and they can't spend them
however they wish. If they aren't transferring the money to another eligible committee, they have to either return the money to those who donated it, or give it to charity.

Senate officials mostly leave it up to individual senators to decide when to declare a conflict of interest. But Sen. Patrick Colbeck. R-Canton, said if he were in Brandenburg's
position, he would have invoked the Senate conflict rule on SB 1022 and abstained from voting. Colbeck, who ran unsuccessfully for governor this year, voted against the bill, despite
the fact he liked some of its features, including a better way of handling reporting for joint fundraisers.

[Clovis]

May?! I'm sorry, but the US political system is truly fucked if this is even a legitimate area of inquiry.

[Borealis]

Under Senate rules, members "having a personal, private, or professional interest in a bill ... shall not vote on the bill," and "shall disclose in writing his or her interest in the bill." The Senate rules define a personal
interest as one "that would provide a benefit particular to a Senator or a benefit particular to any individual or entity to whom the Senator is financially or legally obligated or is personally related."

Senate officials mostly leave it up to individual senators to decide when to declare a conflict of interest.

[Clovis]

I remember the Last Week Tonight episode about State Legislatures and ALEC where this issue came up. Some guy asked if doing work for a big plastics company was a conflict of interest in terms of voting for something related to loosening regulations (or something like that) and he was just told there was no conflict. Self-moderation doesn't really work.