The Center for Public Integrity

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Massachusetts is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 13 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees personal financial disclosure for members of the legislature.

Massachusetts is among the 22 states that established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements of legislators in the post-Watergate 1970s.

Massachusetts, along with California and Hawaii, are the only three states that pick ethics agency commission members without any input from the legislature.

Budget

Massachusetts is among 22 states that did approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin. Six state ethics agency budgets — in Arkansas, Georgia, Maine, Nevada, New Jersey and Washington — at least doubled during this time period.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

North Dakota is among four states — including Michigan, South Dakota and Vermont — in which there are no formal ethics laws dealing with ethical conduct of legislator beyond personal financial disclosure and/or campaign finance disclosure requirements.

More Info

What, if any, ethics agency exists in the state?

None.

If the above agency does not oversee legislators, is legislative oversight defined in statute?

Yes. North Dakota has the Legislative Council, which is enabled by North Dakota Century Code s.54-35-02.8, to appoint an ethics committee to consider or prepare a legislative code of ethics. The legislative council consists of the majority and minority leaders of the house and of the senate, plus six senators and seven representatives.
http://ranch.state.nd.us/LR/01/cencode/CCT54.pdf

Are there state statutes that address ethical conduct for legislators?

No. North Dakota has no statute regarding ethics and disclosure beyond sections pertaining candidates' campaign finance and outside interest disclosure, which are both governed by the North Dakota Secretary of State, Elections Division.
http://www.state.nd.us/sec/Elections/Elections.htm

When were the ethics statutes enacted?

N/A

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Virginia is one of 27 states in which no outside agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 8 of those states where any outside oversight for members of the legislature is lumped in with the responsibilities of the secretary of state or attorney general.

More Info

What, if any, ethics agency exists in the state?

None.

If the above agency does not oversee legislators, is legislative oversight defined in statute?

Yes. Virginia has the House Ethics Advisory Panel and the Senate Ethics Advisory Panel, which are enabled by Code of Virginia s.30-112. In the house, the panel is made up of three former house members and two public members. In the senate, the panel is made up of a retired justice, two former senate members and two public members.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+30-112

Are there state statutes that address ethical conduct for legislators?

Yes. Code of Virginia, Title 2.2, Chapter 31, "State and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act" applies to legislators.
http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+TOC02020000031000000000000

When were the ethics statutes enacted?

1987

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Hawaii is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 13 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees personal financial disclosure for members of the legislature.

Hawaii is the only state that established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirement of lawmakers prior to the Watergate scandal of 1972; the Hawaii State Ethics Commission was set up in 1968.

Hawaii, along with California and Massachusetts, are the only three states that pick ethics agency commission members without any input from the legislature.

Budget

Hawaii is among 10 states that did not approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon and West Virginia. Two state ethics agency budgets — in Missouri and Montana — actually decreased during this time period.

Conduct

To identify the extent of outside oversight applied to state legislators, the Center included six categories of conduct often found in ethics law in the survey of state ethics agencies: conflicts of interest, improper use of office/abuse of power, nepotism, acceptance of honorarium and gifts and post-term employment restrictions. Of the 23 states in which there is outside oversight of ethical conduct, all have a provision dealing with lawmakers' possible conflicts of interest. However, Hawaii's ethics agency does not oversee one category of conduct for legislators — nepotism.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

West Virginia is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 13 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees personal financial disclosure for members of the legislature.

West Virginia is one of 9 states that waited until the 1980s or the 1990s to established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements of legislators.

Of the 32 states that have outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements for legislators — 23 that cover ethics and disclosure, plus nine that cover disclosure only — West Virginia is one of 17 where the legislature has some involvement in choosing commission members. Only three states — California, Hawaii and Massachusetts — have members picked without the input of the legislature.

Budget

West Virginia is among 10 states that did not approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon and West Virginia. Two state ethics agency budgets - in Missouri and Montana — actually decreased during this time period.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Minnesota is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 10 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees both personal financial disclosure and campaign finance disclosure for members of the legislature.

Minnesota is among the 22 states that established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements of legislators in the post-Watergate 1970s.

Of the 32 states that have outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements for legislators — 23 that cover ethics and disclosure, plus nine that cover disclosure only — Minnesota is one of 17 where the legislature has some involvement in choosing commission members. Only three states — California, Hawaii and Massachusetts — have members picked without the input of the legislature.

Budget

Minnesota is among 22 states that did approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin. Six state ethics agency budgets — in Arkansas, Georgia, Maine, Nevada, New Jersey and Washington — at least doubled during this time period.

23 states have an independent commission that regulates conduct of state legislators – such as conflicts of interest, abuse of office, post-term employment restrictions.

• AR, CA, KS, LA, ME, MO, MN, NE, OK, TX (10 states)
  (this subset also oversees personal financial disclosure and campaign finance)
• AL, CT, FL, HI, KY, MA, MS, NV, OR, PA, RI, WV, WI (13 states)
  (this subset also oversees personal financial disclosure)

27 states have no independent entity that regulates conduct of state legislators

HOWEVER, 9 of those 27 states have independent commissions that regulate personal financial disclosure laws and campaign finance laws for legislators

• AK, GA, MT, NJ, TN, WA (6 states)
  (this subset oversees both aspects of disclosure)
• DE, MD (2 states)
  (this subset only oversees personal financial disclosure)
• IA (1 state)
  (this subset only oversees campaign finance disclosure)

AND, 18 of those 27 states have no independent commissions to oversee conduct or disclosure laws for legislators

• IN, IL, MI*, NY, NC, OH, SC (7 states)
  (this subset has independent entities set up that DO NOT oversee legislators; campaign disclosure for these state is overseen by elections divisions)
• AZ (SOS), CO (SOS), ID (SOS), NH (SOS), NM (SOS), UT (AG), VA (AG), WY (AG) (8 states)
  (this subset has no independent entities set up to over see conduct or disclosure for anyone; disclosure for these states is overseen by Secretary of State offices, often times the elections divisions; other ethics laws may be administered by Secretary of State offices and Attorneys General)
• ND, SD, VT (3 states) and MI
  (this subset has NO formal ethics laws covering conduct of legislators)

*MI also does not have formal ethics laws for legislators beyond some campaign disclosure.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Oklahoma is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 10 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees both personal financial disclosure and campaign finance disclosure for members of the legislature.

Oklahoma is one of 9 states that waited until the 1980s or the 1990s to established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements of legislators.

Of the 32 states that have outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements for legislators — 23 that cover ethics and disclosure, plus nine that cover disclosure only — Oklahoma is one of 12 where the legislature appoints at least one commission member. Only three states - California, Hawaii and Massachusetts — have members picked without the input of the legislature.

Budget

Oklahoma is among 10 states that did not approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Oklahoma, Oregon and West Virginia. Two state ethics agency budgets — in Missouri and Montana — actually decreased during this time period.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Pennsylvania is one of 23 states in which an outside ethics agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 13 of those states where the ethics agency also oversees personal financial disclosure for members of the legislature.

Pennsylvania is among the 22 states that established outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements of legislators in the post-Watergate 1970s.

Of the 32 states that have outside oversight of ethical conduct and/or disclosure requirements for legislators — 23 that cover ethics and disclosure, plus nine that cover disclosure only — Pennsylvania is one of 12 where the legislature appoints at least one commission member. Only three states - California, Hawaii and Massachusetts — have members picked without the input of the legislature.

Budget

Pennsylvania is among 22 states that did approve a budget for its ethics agency exceeding the rate of inflation, or 7 percent, between 1997 and 2000. Those states include Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Tennessee, Washington and Wisconsin. Six state ethics agency budgets — in Arkansas, Georgia, Maine, Nevada, New Jersey and Washington — at least doubled during this time period.

Oversight Summary
Oversight Survey

Illinois is one of 27 states in which no outside agency oversees ethical conduct of state legislators. It is one of 18 of those states where no ethics agency oversees any aspect of disclosure. Illinois is among seven of those states — including Indiana, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio and South Carolina — in which an outside agency is setup to oversee other divisions of government.

More Info

What, if any, ethics agency exists in the state?

Illinois has the State of Illinois Board of Ethics, which is authorized under Executive Order 77-3 (ie, not in statute). The board administers a personal economic disclosure program covering 10,000 appointees and employees. Jurisdiction does not extend to legislators, members of the judicial branch or people holding elective office in Executive Branch.
http://www.state.il.us/ethics/

If the above agency does not oversee legislators, is legislative oversight defined in statute?

No.

Are there state statutes that address ethical conduct for legislators?

Yes. It is the Illinois Governmental Ethics Act - 5 ILCS 420/1-101. In regard to legislators, the act contains "Restricted Activities," "Rules of Conduct for Legislators" and "Ethical Principles for Legislators."
http://www.legis.state.il.us/ilcs/ch5/ch5act420articles/ch5act420artstoc.htm