Ethics panel: MN Senate President must disclose possible future conflicts
Though in that same motion, the panel made no finding on whether Champion had a conflict of interest when he carried a 2023 bill that gave state money to a nonprofit whose founder he had done free legal work for in the past.
Further, they found no financial conflict in a bill he sponsored this year to bring that organization another $1 million.
The decision was unanimous, though the Ethics Subcommittee has two Democratic-Farmer-Labor and two Republican members and often deadlocks or rules inconclusively.
On May 5, it's expected to hear a Senate GOP complaint against Champion regarding his relationships with nonprofits he helped fund.
Champion, a Minneapolis DFLer, has been under scrutiny in recent weeks after reports that he helped the violence prevention nonprofit 21 Days of Peace obtain $3 million in funding, and that he had done pro bono work for its founder, Jerry McAfee.
The senator temporarily stepped down as chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct and asked for an advisory opinion on April 7, and has maintained that his pro bono work did not coincide with his sponsorship of the bills.
''I appreciate the conclusion the members of the Ethics Subcommittee, which as expected found that I had not violated Senate rules,' Champion said in a statement. 'I sought the advisory opinion from the in full confidence that I have followed the rules of the Senate with regards to conflict of interest, and conducted myself with integrity.'
Minnesota's ethics rules for legislators are not particularly expansive. Current law bans members from voting on matters that result in a direct financial gain for themselves or their business disproportionate to others in the same field.
Political observers and lawmakers of both parties have noted that Minnesota's part-time 'citizen legislature' naturally lends itself to members voting on issues directly related to their work and communities. Teachers, nurses and business owners often back or carry bills directly related to their lines of work.
As the Senate Ethics Subcommittee prepared to pass a motion Thursday, Chair Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, who joined the committee after Champion stepped down, reflected on that challenge for Minnesota lawmakers.
'I think that we have to be very careful with this advisory opinion and what we issue, because if we're doing our job as legislators, as I said, we have a lot of relationships and a lot of people we know in the community, and that informs our work as legislators,' she said. 'That should be considered a good thing.'
Pappas said the advisory opinion from the Ethics Subcommittee telling Champion to disclose potential conflicts in the future was a reminder for all members to weigh how their connections might affect their work.
Champion's connection to nonprofits he helped fund has raised questions in the Legislature about changing state ethics rules.
Senate Republicans have said that regardless of whether Champion violated rules, state lawmakers should hold themselves to a higher standard of conduct.
Sen. Michael Kreun, R-Blaine, who brought the complaint against Champion, has said a big part of his concern is that Champion had interactions with McAfee, which would be private under attorney-client privilege rules.
'The choice to carry legislation that provided funding to an entity with which Champion has a privileged relationship without disclosing the relationship fails to meet those standards,' he said in a Thursday statement. 'This opinion from the Subcommittee on Ethical Conduct acknowledges that fact by saying he should make disclosures in the future.'
The Ethics Subcommittee will hear Kreun's complaint at a meeting where they'll officially adopt Thursday's advisory opinion. Kreun's complaint requests that the subcommittee look into whether Champion violated rules prohibiting actions that discredit the Senate or undermine public trust in government.
UMN disease research center to launch vaccine integrity project
Walz seeks GOP help on budget, blasts Trump 'chaos' in State of the State speech
Jim Gelbmann: Our partisan endorsement process is unrepresentative, polarizing and self-serving
Minnesota gun-carry permit age drops from 21 to 18 after legal challenge
Keith Ellison sues Trump administration over orders on transgender issues
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
California Republicans file suit to halt redistricting plan
California Republican legislators on Tuesday announced a state Supreme Court petition, an effort to stop Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D) plan to redistrict House seats in the Golden State. 'Today I joined my colleagues in filing a lawsuit challenging the rushed redistricting process. California's Constitution requires bills to be in print for 30 days, but that safeguard was ignored. By bypassing this provision, Sacramento has effectively shut voters out of engaging in their own legislative process,' Assemblyman Tri Ta said on X. The petition cites a section of the state constitution that requires a month-long review period for new legislation. Democrats are working quickly to set up a special election that would let voters weigh in on the redistricting plan. Four state Republican legislators have signed on to the petition, according to a copy for a writ of mandate, shared by the New York Times. They're asking for immediate relief, no later than Aug. 20, and arguing that action can't be taken on the legislative package before Sep. 18. 'Last night, we filed a petition with the California Supreme Court to stop the California legislature from violating the rights of the people of California,' said Mike Columbo, a partner at Dhillon Law Group, in a Tuesday press conference alongside California Republicans. 'The California constitution clearly gives the people of California the right to see new legislation that the legislature is going to consider, and it gives them the right to review it for 30 days,' Columbo said. California Democrats swiftly introduced the redistricting legislative package when they reconvened after summer break on Monday, and are expected to vote as soon as Thursday. They have until Friday to complete the plan in time to set up a Nov. 4 special election. Columbo called that pace of action a 'flagrant violation' under the state constitution. Democrats are aiming to put a ballot measure before voters that would allow temporary redistricting, effectively bypassing the existing independent redistricting commission — which was approved by voters more than a decade ago and typically redistricts after each census — to redraw lines in direct response to GOP gerrymandering in other states. California Republicans have vowed to fight back. Democrats, on the other hand, are stressing that they're moving transparently to let voters have the final say on whether redistricting happens.
Miami Herald
24 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Trump wants to end mail-in voting. DeSantis says Florida's system is fine
Gov. Ron DeSantis said Tuesday that he doesn't think President Donald Trump's desire to ban voting by mail applies to Florida. Asked about Trump's vow on Monday to 'lead a movement' to end the use of mail-in ballots, DeSantis said he thought it only applied to states that send mail ballots to all voters. 'What he means by vote my mail, I think, just in my conversations, is the states like California and Nevada and others, where they just send all these ballots out into the ether,' DeSantis said during a news conference. He defended Florida's system, in which voters have to request a vote-by-mail ballot. 'I think what Florida has is absentee voting,' he said. He noted that county elections supervisors don't mail ballots to anyone who hasn't requested one. Trump's post on Truth Social made no such distinctions. He wrote that he would issue an executive order to bring 'honesty' to the 2026 elections by getting 'rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS' as well as 'Highly 'Inaccurate,' Very Expensive, and Seriously Controversial VOTING MACHINES.' 'It's time that the Republicans get tough and stop it, because the Democrats want it,' Trump later told reporters. Trump does not have the power to change voting laws. The Constitution gives states the power to set the 'times, places and manner' of elections. Trump's longstanding grievance with voting by mail — a method he has used to vote in Palm Beach County — has exposed rifts among Florida Republicans over the last few years. The state's GOP leaders have promoted the use of voting by mail over the last two decades, even changing the name from 'absentee' to 'vote by mail' to imply that voters don't have to be absent to make use of it. More than 3 million Floridians voted by mail in last year's election. But DeSantis and the party have had to bat down fringe elements who have embraced Trump's claims of widespread voter fraud, including with the use of mail-in ballots in Florida. Lawmakers have responded by making it harder to request, renew and submit mail ballots. DeSantis said Tuesday that voting by mail is 'popular' in Florida, and he questioned how banning it outright would work. 'Clearly, you would need some absentee [ballots] for military overseas [voters], right?' DeSantis said. 'I mean, so that's at a minimum, you'd need that.'
New York Post
24 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's war on mail-in voting is futile — and could hurt the GOP
President Trump is threatening to wage war on mail-in ballots — and the GOP has to hope he thinks again before the 2026 mid-terms. In a Truth Social post, Trump said he is 'going to lead a movement to get rid of MAIL-IN BALLOTS,' and he'll start off with 'an EXECUTIVE ORDER to help bring HONESTY to the 2026 midterm elections.' Trump likes the idea of in-person, same-day voting, which has much to recommend it. Advertisement But mail-in and early voting are so ingrained and widespread that they aren't going anywhere. Most Republicans have concluded that there's no alternative to making use of these modes of voting, and crucially, they managed — most of the time — to get Trump on board in 2024. Advertisement This aided the Republican get-out-the-vote operation in a close election. Clearly, though, Trump believes that mail-in voting is a Democratic plot, and he also hates contemporary voting machines. Old-school paper ballots don't guarantee honesty, however: In an infamous instance of voter fraud, allies of Lyndon Johnson stuffed Box 13 with enough ballots to put him over the top in the very narrow 1948 Democratic Senate primary in Texas. Today's voting machines, moreover, were a reaction to the Florida fiasco in 2000, when punch-card ballots had to be painstakingly examined by hand with a presidential election at stake. Advertisement The fact is that vote-by-mail has been steadily growing since the 1980s, and it needn't favor one side or the other. In Florida, Republicans have long made it a priority to maximize mail voting. A study by the academic Andrew Hall of pre-COVID voting patterns in California, Utah and Washington found a negligible partisan effect as those states rolled out vote-by-mail systems. Advertisement Overall, turnout went up only very slightly, and 'the Democratic share of turnout did not increase appreciably.' Mail-in voting didn't change who was voting, but how they did it — encouraging, as you might expect, voting by mail rather than in-person. Vote-by-mail did have a strong partisan tilt in the COVID election of 2020, in part because Trump inveighed against it. In 2024, Republicans made a concerted effort to make up ground — and succeeded. The GOP went from 24% of the mail vote in the must-win swing state of Pennsylvania in 2020, to 33% in 2024. And Republicans outpaced Democrats in mail-in balloting in Arizona. The advantage to a party of getting people to vote early — whether in person or by mail — is that it takes high-propensity voters off the table. Then, a turnout operation can focus on getting lower-propensity voters to the polls. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters If no one votes until Election Day, party operatives waste time and money right up to the cusp of the election contacting people who are going to vote no matter what. Advertisement None of this is to say that all mail-in voting is equal. So-called universal mail-in voting, or automatically sending a ballot to every registered voter and scattering live ballots around a state, is a bad practice. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! The rules should be more stringent. Advertisement Georgia, for example, gets this right: You have to ask for an absentee ballot and provide your driver's license number or a copy of another form of valid ID. Ballots have to be requested at least 11 days before the election and must be returned by Election Day. The outer 'oath' envelope has to be properly completed or the ballot is subject to being rejected, although the county elections office will provide the voter a chance to 'cure' the envelope. Advertisement It's also important to count early and mail-in ballots quickly, something that too many states fail to do, with California — as usual — the worst offender. States should be expected to abide by whatever rules have been set prior to an election, rather than changing them on the fly, and they should ensure that voter rolls are regularly cleaned up. The real question about vote-by-mail isn't whether it is staying or going, but whether Republicans, too, will take advantage of it. Twitter: @RichLowry
