Image Credit: Tennessee General Assembly
The Tennessee Conservative [By Adelia Kirchner] –
During a January 14th meeting of the House Select Committee on Rules, where official rules of order were decided for the 114th General Assembly, House GOP members voted down a rule change that would have prevented conflicts of interest that might occur when a lawmaker’s family member is paid to lobby the General Assembly.
Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville-District 52), proposed a rule change to Article 2, Section 3 of the House Rules of Order which applies to ethical standards and requires representatives to disclose to the Tennessee Ethics Commission, “personal interests resulting from a spouse, sibling or child of the representative who is a registered lobbyist.”
The Democrat representative suggested that this section of the rules be amended to completely prohibit this practice, instead of allowing it to continue so long as it is disclosed.
“We have a lawmaker in this General Assembly right now, who is a lawmaker voting on legislation and their spouse is a lobbyist who can lobby other members in the General Assembly, get paid, and their husband, you all know who I’m talking about, is a member of the Senate and his wife is a lobbyist,” Jones addressed his colleagues, referencing Sen. Bo Watson’s wife. “That is corrupt. That is unethical. That gives the appearance of impropriety. […] If you have a spouse or a child, they should not be a lobbyist in this building.”
Before the committee voted on this rule change, House Majority Leader and Chairman of the committee, Rep. William Lamberth (R-Portland-District 44), verified that Jones wanted the committee to conduct a roll call vote instead of a voice vote.
“I think that all of your constituents have the right to know how you vote on this, so I just want this to be on the record,” Jones said.
When Rep. Ryan Williams (R- Cookeville-District 42) asked if the language took into consideration “if one of the two folks in the marriage was performing those duties prior to that marriage,” Jones had a lengthy response.
“If you run for office and your spouse is a lobbyist, then they maybe shouldn’t be a lobbyist anymore, because you are there as an advocate and a person who gets to vote on bills,” he said. “If you are married to somebody who is a lobbyist, or your child is a lobbyist, they should not be able to lobby you to get you to vote on something. Again, it’s corruption. This is an anti-corruption bill, that in fact, came to me from Republicans. That came to me from conservatives who are tired of corruption. […] This is a very common sense [rule change] and I hope that we can have bi-partisan support of it.”
“So if my wife and I met here after I got elected, and she was a lobbyist before that, before she chose to marry me, she’d have to quit her profession?” asked Williams.
Jones replied, “First of all, I would file an ethics complaint against you. Because if you are dating a lobbyist here and you end up marrying a lobbyist here, someone who comes to your office in a work capacity, then I’ll file an ethics complaint against you first of all, because that shouldn’t be happening.”
While Jones was speaking, Chairman Lamberth interrupted to make a clarification.
“I will say just for point of reference, that I think Chairman Williams has been married a really long time. Way before he ever got here,” said Lamberth. “So I think we’re dealing with hypotheticals. I just want to make that clear.”
Jones noted that Williams had asked a question based on an example and that he was giving a response to that example.
“The example he gave, he asked a question. You can try and joke but this is a serious thing,” said Jones.
“I’m not joking,” said Lamberth. “I’m just saying we’re dealing with hypotheticals.”
In a final statement on the issue, Jones referenced how a similar conflict of interest would be expected to go down in a courtroom.
“If a judge had a lawyer coming forth who was their spouse, the judge would have to do what Lamberth? Recuse themself. If they had a lawyer coming forth who was their child, they would have to do what Lamberth? Recuse themself,” said Jones. “It’s about avoiding the appearance of impropriety and ensuring that our constituents see that we’re here without any undue influence, without any unethical behavior that may influence our vote.”
The rule change failed in committee by a 9-2 vote.
Republican Representatives William Lamberth, John Crawford, Tandy Darby, Jeremy Faison, Andrew Farmer, Rusty Grills, Gary Hicks, and Ryan Williams all voted against it.
Democrat Representatives Karen D. Camper and Johnny Shaw voted in favor of the change.
Representative Yusuf Hakeem was the only Democrat on the committee who joined House GOP members in voting the rule change down.
“When 95-98% of TNGOP Primary voters say this is DEAD WRONG, why would these reps endorse this behavior with their votes? So Bo Watson will ‘owe them one?’” The Tennessee Conservative’s Brandon Lewis asked in a recent social media post. “Should TN Reps & Senators get filthy rich because their spouses are corporate, tax-payer-funded lobbyists?”
About the Author: Adelia Kirchner is a Tennessee resident and reporter for the Tennessee Conservative. Currently the host of Subtle Rampage Podcast, she has also worked for the South Dakota State Legislature and interned for Senator Bill Hagerty’s Office in Nashville, Tennessee. Adelia is The Tennessee Conservative’s on-site reporter for the Tennessee General Assembly. You can reach Adelia at adelia@tennesseeconservativenews.com.
