The Colorado voters passed Amendment 54 in the November, 2008 elections, which amends the Colorado Consitution to limit campaign contributions: Text of the Proposed Initiative (.pdf) and Text of the Constitutional Amendment (.pdf). The consitutional amendment carries a presumption of impropriety between contributions to political campaigns and the award of sole source government contracts.
Archive | Government Contracting RSS feed for this section
West Virginia’s Pay-to-Play Law
West Virgina addresses pay-to-play abuse by limiting campaign contributions during the negotiation and performance of the contract. West Viginia Code §3-8-12(d) provides: (d) Except as provided in section eight of this article, no person entering into any contract with the State or its subdivisions, or any department or agency of the State, either for rendition [...]
Kentucky’s Pay-to-Play Law
Kentucky places limitation on campaign contributors who get no-bid contracts from the state. K.R.S. §121.056(2) provides: No person who has contributed more than the maximum legal contribution established by KRS 121.150 in any one (1) election to a slate of candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor that is elected to office or any entity in [...]
Chart of Pay to Play Restrictions
Public Citizen has published a chart of the restrictions on campaign contributions from government contractors (.pdf)
South Carolina’s Pay-To-Play Law
South Carolina restricts campaign contributions by a contractor to a candidate who participated in awarding the contract. South Carolina Code §8-13-1342 provides: No person who has been awarded a contract with the State, a county, a municipality, or a political subdivision thereof, other than contracts awarded through competitive bidding practices, may make a contribution after [...]
Ohio’s Pay-To-Play Law
On January 2, 2007, then Ohio Governor Taft signed into law Substitute House Bill 694, enacting changes to Ohio’s pay-to-play laws. The new law places restrictions on many political contributors who currently hold, or are competing for, a contract with the state or local government. The new law also extends these prohibitions to many local [...]
Hawaii’s Pay-To-Play Law
Hawaii Revised Statutes §11-205.5 places limitations on campaign contributions by state and county contractors.
Connecticut’s Pay-to-Play Law
Connecticut’s law imposes a contribution and solicitation ban on state contractors, prospective state contractors, and their principals. A few, but not all, of the principals now covered under the law are as follows: Members of the company’s Board of Directors; Individuals owning 5% or more of the company’s stock; Individuals at the company living or [...]
New Jersey’s Pay-to-Play Law
New Jersey enacted the Campaign Contributions and Expenditure Reporting Act, N.J.S.A. 19:44A-20.13 et seq. (“Chapter 51”) to limit abuses of pay-to-play. Among other things, Chapter 51 prohibits a State agency from awarding a State contract whose value exceeds $17,500 to a business entity that contributed more than $300 to the Governor, a candidate for Governor, [...]
States With Pay-to-Play Laws
Twelve states have some variant of a pay-to-play law: California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Rhode Island, and West Virginia. Regardless of where you are doing business, if it entails contracting with, attempting to contract with or otherwise providing goods or services to a governmental entity, you need [...]
