Rep. Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, speaks to a colleague in the Alabama House of Representatives on May 8, 2024 at the Alabama Statehouse in Montgomery, Alabama. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector)
A south Alabama representative plans to revive a proposal to overhaul the state’s ethics laws.
Rep. Matt Simpson, R-Daphne, said Tuesday he will reintroduce the legislation in the 2025 session, after a bill he filed last year failed to pass.
“We passed a resolution allowing the Legislative Services Agency to hire an attorney to evaluate our ethics laws,” Simpson said in an interview. “I’m anticipating that report by the end of the year, and once we have it, we’ll see how we can make our ethics laws the best they can be.”
The bill, which aimed to overhaul the state’s ethics code, faced significant opposition, particularly from the Alabama Ethics Commission and the Attorney General’s Office. Despite the bill’s defeat, Simpson said he already started preparing for the next legislative session by working with Sen. Sam Givhan, R-Huntsville.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Givhan — who said he handled the bill in the Senate committee and would have handled it on the floor — declined to comment about any future legislation, saying that he wants to “keep an open mind.”
“I want to keep my powder dry till I hear from, hear from the consultant,” he said.
Simpson’s 2024 bill aimed to distinguish between civil and criminal ethics violations, an approach he believes could improve enforcement.
Under the current law, an intentional ethics violation is classified as a felony, while unintentional violations are treated as misdemeanors. Simpson argues that this creates an environment where minor infractions are either ignored or inappropriately escalated to criminal charges.
Legislation to change Alabama ethics law dies in committee
“There’s a concern that if certain aspects of the law aren’t being enforced, then let’s make that part civil,” Simpson said, referring to less severe violations like minor financial disclosures.
His bill proposed that only serious offenses, such as bribery or the misuse of office for personal gain, should be prosecuted criminally, while other violations should be handled by the Ethics Commission through civil penalties.
The former bill would also have weakened the Ethics Commission’s powers and provided for five-year terms for the director, who may be reappointed subject to Senate confirmation. Simpson said they have not been involved in discussions. Thomas Albritton, the commission’s director, was unavailable for comment.
Albritton said at the time the proposal would weaken ethics laws, saying that the “independence of the Ethics Commission is a fundamental principle, it is a national principle, and it is to be guarded for the goodwill of public servants primarily.”
In a February letter, the Alabama Ethics Commission said the bill shifts responsibility for interpreting use of office for personal gain and corruption from the Ethics Commission’s law enforcement division to district attorneys and the Attorney General.
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall also criticized the bill for lowering penalties. In an editorial, he argued that it raises the threshold for how much money officials can receive without breaking ethics rules and downgrades many criminal offenses to civil ones.
Marshall said that current law already allows minor ethics violations to be resolved without criminal charges and that Simpson’s bill imposes civil penalties, like for a range of serious violations of public trust, no matter the amount of money involved.
Despite the Ethics Commission’s resistance to Simpson’s initial proposal, Simpson said he is open to collaboration.
“If they’re willing to talk, I’m more than willing to have these conversations,” he said, while also expressing frustration that the Commission focused more on opposing the bill than on working to improve the state’s ethics laws.
Simpson plans to have the new bill ready for pre-filing in January, with identical versions introduced in both the House and Senate. He emphasized the importance of transparency and accountability in the process, saying that the attorney’s recommendations would be carefully considered before the legislation is finalized.
“I’m not going to give up this easily and just say, ‘Oh, well, it failed this year.’ It’s something that’s always been a multi-year process … It’s been almost two years we’ve been working on this bill. So, I’m not giving up just yet. I’m ready to go back for the 2025 session.”
Updated at 9:15 a.m. to clarify that Givhan commented after messages were left.
DONATE: SUPPORT NEWS YOU TRUST
Most Popular
Comments / 0