[EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/16/11

Sun Oct 16 15:13:59 PDT 2011

How does the MSRB's Rule G-37 apply to sate legislators who actually hold separate jobs in the muni bond industry that fund their own campaigns or use their campaign funds to contribute to other candidates and PACS?

I'm curious because, in Texas, I can think of several legislators currently working private sector jobs who would be covered by G-37. 

Vince Leibowitz
Principal Consultant
The Dawn Group
vince.leibowitz at gmail.com
vince at dgtexas.com
DGTexas.com
512.705.7001 (m)
512.861.2370 (f)
512.318.2432 (o)

Sent from my iPhone

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. It may also be privileged or otherwise protected by work-product immunity or other legal rules. If you are not the named addressee, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this email. Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have received this email by mistake and delete this email from your system. 

On Oct 16, 2011, at 4:36 PM, "Bonin, Adam C." <ABonin at cozen.com> wrote:

> The rule does not apply to every state official seeking federal office, but only those state officials with formal authority/influence over the selection of investment advisers (in whatever office they're now seeking).
> 
> ________________________________
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Edward Still [still at votelaw.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 5:20 PM
> To: law-election at UCI.EDU
> Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/16/11
> 
> Adam,
> 
> Would you agree that Rick Perry is covered because he is a current state officeholder, not because he is running for a federal office, as the Weekly Standard stated?
> 
> Edward Still
> Edward Still Law Firm LLC
> 130 Wildwood Parkway, Suite 108, PMB 304
> Birmingham AL 35209
> 205-320-2882 (voice & fax)
>  www.votelaw.com/blog<http://www.votelaw.com/blog>
>  www.edwardstill.com<http://www.edwardstill.com/>
>  www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill<http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill><http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill>
> 
> 
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Bonin, Adam C. <ABonin at cozen.com<mailto:ABonin at cozen.com>> wrote:
> The Rule excludes federal officials, insofar as the definition of "government entity" whose officials are covered is "any state or political subdivision of a state."  Rule 206(4)-5(f)(5).  http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2010/ia-3043.pdf
> 
>> From the summary:
> 
> The rule’s two-year time out is triggered by a contribution to an “official” of a “government entity.” An official includes an incumbent, candidate or successful candidate for elective office of a government entity if the office is directly or indirectly responsible for, or can influence the outcome of, the hiring of an investment adviser or has authority to appoint any person who is directly or indirectly responsible for, or can influence the outcome of, the hiring of an investment adviser. Government entities include all state and local governments, their agencies and instrumentalities, and all public pension plans and other collective government funds, including participant-directed plans such as 403(b), 457, and 529 plans.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] on behalf of John Tanner [john.k.tanner at gmail.com<mailto:john.k.tanner at gmail.com>]
> Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 4:23 PM
> To: Edward Still
> Cc: law-election at UCI.EDU<mailto:law-election at UCI.EDU>
> Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 10/16/11
> 
> It looks like this is addressed to those who manage pension funds.  Does the federal government actually manage any pension funds?  I understood that federal pensions, like social security, are not backed by actual assets that are invested in anything other than, perhaps, Treasury bonds that we have sold to ourselves -- that they're secured by a general promise to pay us later or at least respect us in the morning.
> 
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Edward Still <still at votelaw.com<mailto:still at votelaw.com><mailto:still at votelaw.com<mailto:still at votelaw.com>>> wrote:
> I have a question about the Weekly Standard article linked below. The article says, "And while this new ruling primarily affects Perry at the presidential level, it could have far-reaching consequences going forward, since it applies to every state office holder seeking federal office from here on out." A quick review of the SEC's final rule<http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2010/ia-3043.pdf> leads me to believe that the rule applies to office holders and candidates at any level of government, not just those seeking federal office. Specifically, the following definition in the rule leads to that conclusion:
> 
> § 275.206(4)-5 (f) (6)
> Official means any person (including any election committee for the person) who was, at the time of the contribution, an incumbent, candidate or successful candidate for elective office of a government entity, if the office:
> (i)
> Is directly or indirectly responsible for, or can influence the outcome of, the hiring of an investment adviser by a government entity; or
> (ii)
> Has authority to appoint any person who is directly or indirectly responsible for, or can influence the outcome of, the hiring of an investment adviser by a government entity.
> 
> Am I wrong in my conclusion?
> 
> 
> Edward Still
> Edward Still Law Firm LLC
> 130 Wildwood Parkway, Suite 108, PMB 304
> Birmingham AL 35209
> 205-320-2882<tel:205-320-2882><tel:205-320-2882<tel:205-320-2882>> (voice & fax)
> www.votelaw.com/blog<http://www.votelaw.com/blog><http://www.votelaw.com/blog>
> www.edwardstill.com<http://www.edwardstill.com><http://www.edwardstill.com/>
> www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill<http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill><http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill>
> 
> 
> On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu><mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>> wrote:
> 
> “The Perils of Donating to Perry; The SEC’s curious role in campaign finance.”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24256>
> Posted on October 15, 2011 5:14 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=24256> by Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
> 
> The Weekly Standard reports<http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/perils-donating-perry_595199.html>.
> 
> [Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D24256&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Perils%20of%20Donating%20to%20Perry%3B%20The%20SEC%E2%80%99s%20curious%20role%20in%20campaign%20finance.%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments Off
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu><mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>>
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
> 
> ________________________________
> Notice: To comply with certain U.S. Treasury regulations, we inform you that, unless expressly stated otherwise, any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this e-mail, including attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any person for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.
> ________________________________
> Notice: This communication, including attachments, may contain information that is confidential and protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. It constitutes non-public information intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If the reader or recipient of this communication is not the intended recipient, an employee or agent of the intended recipient who is responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, or you believe that you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and promptly delete this e-mail, including attachments without reading or saving them in any manner. The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney/client or other privilege.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election