Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Lobbying topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House rejects one-year cooling-off ban for former officials after heated debate
Summary
The House debated and rejected a bill that would have barred former legislators, department heads and commissioners from paid lobbying for one year, citing concerns about scope, workability, and impacts on part‑time lawmakers’ careers.
Representative Jordan Tanner introduced a second substitute of House Bill 11 to impose a one‑year cooling‑off period preventing former legislators, department heads and certain commissioners from serving as paid lobbyists. Tanner said the measure was intended to reduce the probability that an officeholder would be effectively hired while still in office and then immediately act as a paid influence on the legislature.
Opponents repeatedly questioned the bill’s definitions and practical effect. Representative Howard and others asked whether the text’s terms — especially what it means to “return” to lobby — would block former officials who never lobbied while in office from representing employers or clients after they left. Representative Holliday said requiring a year’s delay would exclude precisely the experienced people who often provide the most knowledge to the legislature and regulatory bodies.
Tanner and supporters defended the cooling‑off period as a minimum standard to avoid the appearance of impropriety and to prevent informal hiring arrangements arranged while an official remained in office. He said the intent was not to ban unpaid or occasional self‑representation: amendments inserted language to permit occasional, unpaid appearances on behalf of oneself or a business that is not registered as a lobbyist.
During floor consideration the House adopted several amendments that clarified the scope and added an “occasionally” exemption for unpaid self‑representation. Debate then shifted to whether the bill would unduly hamper the ability of citizen‑legislators to hold regular jobs and later represent employers' regulatory interests. Representative Pignanelli and others warned the measure could prevent a small business from using an employee who had served in the Legislature to explain technical issues to an insurance or agricultural commissioner for a year.
After extended debate and a call for division, the House recorded 30 yes votes and 43 no votes on the second substitute; the motion failed and the measure was filed. The sponsor said supporters could seek other avenues, but opponents characterized the bill as overbroad and potentially harmful to the part‑time legislature.
