Home  >  Nebraska  >  Avery’s Bill would crack down on PSC Contributions

Avery’s Bill would crack down on PSC Contributions

By   /   January 17, 2012  /   6 Comments

Lincoln Sen. Bill Avery introduced a bill today that would ban candidates for the state Public Service Commission from accepting campaign contributions from the utilities regulated by the body.

Sen. Bill Avery of Lincoln

Avery said the vast majority of contributions to PSC candidates come from the industries the board regulates, particularly telecommunications companies, cable companies and phone companies.

Avery’s bill, LB1025, is similar to a measure he introduced in 2007, but it got a cool reception from an “extremely hostile” committee, he said.

“I’ve long been uncomfortable with the cozy relationship between the PSC and the industries they regulate,” Avery said today. “I think that creates a bad impression.”

And now that the PSC is charged with overseeing the location of oil pipelines, the legislation is even more needed, Avery said.

“That changes the game,” he said. “Now we’re bringing one of the largest industry groups in the country, with very deep pockets. They’re a very powerful group of people who are used to getting what they want without having to do a whole lot to get it. I’m afraid that they will throw a lot of money around at a lot of these races for Public Service Commission.”

A commissioner who received 90 percent of their campaign contributions from the industry may think twice about making a decision the industry doesn’t like, Avery said.

The argument used against Avery’s bill in 2007 was that legislators should play by the same rules – not take contributions from any industry they might make a decision about. Avery rejects that argument, saying the Legislature isn’t a regulatory agency and serves broader interests.

Common Cause of Nebraska spokesman Jack Gould said it stands to reason that commissioners shouldn’t take contributions from the industries they regulate, but he estimates about 90 to 95 percent do.

“You have to ask yourself, who do these guys work for? Do they work for the public or do they work for the people who finance their campaigns?”

Public Service Commissioner Jerry Vap raised $21,300 and Commissioner Rod Johnson nearly $16,000 during their six-year terms, according to Common Cause.

Most Nebraskans don’t know who their public service commissioners are, Gould said, because the commissioners are more beholden to the industries who finance their campaigns. If they had to rely on contributions from people, they’d be more responsive to people, Gould said.

Reported by Deena Winter, deena@nebraskawatchdog.org.

!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=”//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js”;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,”script”,”twitter-wjs”);

Editor’s note: to subscribe free of charge to News Updates from Nebraska Watchdog click here

Please, feel free to "steal our stuff"! Just remember to credit Watchdog.org. Find out more

Deena Winter

  • Seriously?

    Senator Avery speaks with “forked tongue.” His ‘broader interests” answer is incredibly self-serving. The PSC should be appointed by the Governor, not elected. This would solve the perceived problems, allowing Sen. Avery to turn his attention to the Legislature, where he is unfounded ideas are major problem…

  • Dirt

    And political appointments would be better because they’d be protected from being ousted by the voters? Put another way, protected from being accountable? Give me a break. This is the same reason the voters, rightly, downed the proposal to scrap the State Treasurer’s office. Having officials subject to being retained by the voters provides a check and balance against cronyism, political or capitalist, run amok.

  • GeosUser

    What does Senator Avery have against Ann Boyle??? Hey Joe, how about reporting the tens of thousands of dollars Ann Carbunkle has gotten in contributions from those same companies regulated by the PSC??? I wonder how Mike and Ann Carbunkle will manage to survive if this bill passes and a major source of their lifestyle support disappears?

  • Danielle

    Shouldn’t this same logic be applied to city councils and mayors who negotiate fire and police union contracts?

  • Sandy

    Of course anyone that stands to lose influence or $ would be against it, but the public should be able to see the simple logic in this bill. There is so much corruption and unfairness at every turn of government that any amount of accountability is a welcome start in the right direction. Don’t care who the messenger is, if the message is good, shutup and support it. Self-serving is the naked term normally covered up by the term “elected representative”. That’s why we try to elect people that think like we do so that in their drive to serve themselves, we might also be served.

  • Really?

    Really? Senator Avery is a complete hypocrit on this. He wants to limit what a PSC candidate can take for contributions? First Amendment issues aside, it should be noted that Senator Avery sits on the Education Committee in the legislature. As a member of this committee, he has recieved over $11,300 in contributions from the Teachers Union. Aside from this, Avery has received contributions from other organizations he oversees via his legislative vote. He has received contributions from many organizations the PSC regulates as well.

    Another issue. If Senator Avery (or any other senator/elected official) decides to run for PSC after his/her term is up, will they return all contributions received as a state senator/elected from organizations he would regulate?

    We have accountability and disclosure laws. If the public is uncomfortable with the influence any contributor has over ANY elected official their disclosures can be used to campaign against them.

    Very dumb piece of legislation and not suprised at all to see Common Cause all about supporting it.