Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.
Rhode Island Ethics Commission Amendment, Question 2 (2016)
| Rhode Island Question 2 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date November 8, 2016 | |
| Topic Government accountability | |
Status Approved | |
| Type Constitutional amendment | Origin State legislature |
| 2016 measures |
|---|
 |
| November 8 |
| Question 1 |
| Question 2 |
| Question 3 |
| Question 4 |
| Question 5 |
| Question 6 |
| Question 7 |
| Polls |
| Voter guides |
| Campaign finance |
| Signature costs |
The Rhode Island Ethics Commission Amendment, also known as Question 2, was on the November 8, 2016, ballot in Rhode Island as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment. It was approved.
| A "yes" vote supported providing the Rhode Island Ethics Commission with authority to investigate alleged misconduct regarding legislative activities. |
| A "no" vote opposed providing the Rhode Island Ethics Commission with authority to investigate alleged misconduct regarding legislative activities, thereby continuing to grant legislators immunity from investigation of legislative acts under the Speech in Debate Clause of the Rhode Island Constitution. |
Election results
| Question 2 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 319,765 | 78.11% | ||
| No | 89,593 | 21.89% | ||
- Election results from Rhode Island Board of Elections
Overview
Previous ethics commission investigative procedure
Previously, the Rhode Island Ethics Commission could not investigate or prosecute legislators for things pertaining to their legislative activities. This inability of the Ethics Commission to investigate or prosecute legislative activities was upheld during a court case. The Supreme Court noted that the constitution could be changed to grant such an ability. Question 2 provided the Ethics Commission with the authority to investigate and prosecute legislative activities. Question 2 also required two-thirds (66.67%) vote by the members of the commission to enact any rules and regulations.
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title was as follows:
| “ |
2. Amendment to the Constitution of the State Restoration of ethics commission jurisdiction over General Assembly members Section 8 of Article III and Section 5 of Article VI of the Constitution[1] |
” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary was as follows:
| “ |
Section 8 of Article III of the Constitution shall be amended to read as follows: Section 8. Ethics commission – Code of ethics. – The general assembly shall establish an independent nonpartisan ethics commission which shall adopt a code of ethics including, but not limited to, provisions on conflicts of interest, confidential information, use of position, contracts with government agencies and financial disclosure. The assent of two-thirds (2/3) of the members appointed shall be required for the adoption for every rule or regulation. All elected and appointed officials and employees of state and local government, of boards, commissions and agencies shall be subject to the code of ethics. The ethics commission shall have the authority to investigate alleged violations of the code of ethics, including acts otherwise protected by Article VI, Section 5, and to impose penalties, as provided by law. Any sanction issued against any party by the ethics commission shall be appealable to the judicial branch as provided by law. The commission shall have the power to remove from office officials who are not otherwise subject to impeachment, or expulsion as provided by Article VI, Section 7. Section 5 of Article VI of the Constitution shall be amended to read as follows: Section 5 of Article VI of the Constitution shall be amended to read as follows: Section 5. Immunities of general assembly members. – The persons of all members of the general assembly shall be exempt from arrest and their estates from attachment in any civil action, during the session of the general assembly, and two days before the commencement and two days after the termination thereof, and all process served contrary hereto shall be void. For any speech in debate in either house, no member shall be questioned in any other place, except by the ethics commission as set forth in Article III, Section 8. Approval of the amendments to Section 8 of Article III and Section 5 of Article VI of the Rhode Island Constitution set forth above will restore the jurisdiction of the ethics commission over members of the General Assembly?[1] |
” |
Constitutional changes
- See also: Rhode Island Constitution
| The amendment made the following changes to Article III, Section VIII of the Rhode Island Constitution:[2][3] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ARTICLE III OF QUALIFICATION OF OFFICE
Section 8. Ethics commission -- Code of ethics. -- The general assembly shall establish an independent non-partisan ethics commission which shall adopt a code of ethics including, but not limited to, provisions on conflicts of interest, confidential information, use of position, contracts with government agencies and financial disclosure. The assent of two-thirds (2/3) of the members appointed shall be required for the adoption for every rule or regulation. All elected and appointed officials and employees of state and local government, of boards, commissions and agencies shall be subject to the code of ethics. The ethics commission shall have the authority to investigate alleged violations of the code of ethics, including acts otherwise protected by Article VI, Section 5, and to impose penalties, as provided by law | |||||
| The amendment made the following changes to Article VI, Section V of the Rhode Island Constitution:[2] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
ARTICLE VI OF LEGISLATIVE POWER Section 5. Immunities of general assembly members. -- The persons of all members of the general assembly shall be exempt from arrest and their estates from attachment in any civil action, during the session of the general assembly, and two days before the commencement and two days after the termination thereof, and all process served contrary hereto shall be void. For any speech in debate in either house, no member shall be questioned in any other place, except by the ethics commission as set forth in Article III, Section 8.[1] | |||||
Full text
The full text of the measure can be found here.
Support
Supporters
Officials
The following legislators sponsored the legislation:[3]
- Rep. Nicholas Mattiello (D-15)
- Rep. John J. DeSimone (D-5)
- Rep. Patricia A. Serpa (D-27)
- Rep. K. Joseph Shekarchi (D-23)
- Rep. Dennis M. Canario (D-71)
Organizations
Individuals
- H. Philip West Jr., former executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island[8]
Campaign finance
As of February 15, 2017, the support campaign for Question 1 featured one ballot question committee, the RI Coalition for Ethics Reform, that received a total of $60,190.00 in contributions. The committee spent $60,751.05.[9]
| Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Support | $60,190.00 | $0.00 | $60,190.00 | $60,751.05 | $60,751.05 |
| Oppose | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 |
| Total | $60,190.00 | $0.00 | $60,190.00 | $60,751.05 | $60,751.05 |
Support
The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committees in support of the measure.[9]
| Committees in support of Question 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Committee | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions | Cash Expenditures | Total Expenditures |
| RI Coalition for Ethics Reform | $60,190.00 | $0.00 | $60,190.00 | $60,751.05 | $60,751.05 |
| Total | $60,190.00 | $0.00 | $60,190.00 | $60,751.05 | $60,751.05 |
Donors
The following were the top donors to the committee.[9]
| Donor | Cash Contributions | In-Kind Contributions | Total Contributions |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alan Hassenfeld | $59,000.00 | $0.00 | $59,000.00 |
| Common Cause Rhode Island | $500.00 | $0.00 | $500.00 |
| Operation Clean Government | $490.00 | $0.00 | $490.00 |
| Clean RI | $100.00 | $0.00 | $100.00 |
| League of Women Voters of Rhode Island | $100.00 | $0.00 | $100.00 |
Background
Rhode Island ethics commission creation
Rhode Island voters created the Rhode Island Ethics Commission via Section 8 in Article 3 of the state constitution, which was adopted during a 1986 constitutional convention. The section specified that the General Assembly should "establish an independent, non-partisan ethics commission which shall adopt a code of ethics" and "the ethics commission shall have the authority to investigate violations of the code of ethics and to impose penalties, as provided by law; and the commission shall have the power to remove from office officials who are not subject to impeachment."[10][11]
Speech in debate clause
Article 6, Section 5 of the Rhode Island Constitution specified that "persons of all members of the general assembly shall be exempt from arrest and their estates from attachment in any civil action, during the session of the general assembly" and "for any speech in debate in either house, no member shall be questioned in any other place."
Irons v. The Rhode Island Ethics Commission et al.
In January 2004, Robert P. Arruda and Beverly M. Clay, the chair and vice chair of the government reform group, Operation Clean Government, filed a complaint with the Rhode Island Ethics Commission. Arruda and Clay alleged that Senator William Irons, who was the then-president of the Rhode Island Senate, engaged in legislative activities and debate regarding certain pharmacy legislation even though he was also an insurance broker and had ties with the pharmaceutical industry, creating a conflict of interest. The commission began its formal investigation of the allegations in March 2004.[12]
Irons filed a request for a jury trial with the commission in April 2007, and then filed a motion to dismiss the remaining charges against him on the basis that the speech in debate clause of the Rhode Island Constitution protected him from prosecution because the charges pertained to legislative acts. Both of these requests were denied, and Irons filed a complaint in the Rhode Island Superior Court.[12]
The Superior Court Justice ruled in favor of Irons' request that the remaining two charges against him be dismissed, stating:[12]
| “ |
“[P]ast legislative acts performed by [Senator] Irons are prohibited from inquiry by the Speech in Debate Clause. Consequently, the Ethics Commission is constitutionally precluded from questioning [Senator] Irons about those acts.[1] |
” |
The commission petitioned the Rhode Island Supreme Court for review of the Superior Court ruling as it related to the speech in debate clause, arguing that sections 7 and 8 of Article III, also known as the Ethics Amendment, in the Rhode Island Constitution granted them an exception to the speech in debate clause.[12]
The Supreme Court upheld the Superior Court ruling that the speech in debate clause protected Irons from any further questioning regarding the charges against him, and dismissed the Ethics Commission's claim that the Ethics Amendment granted an exception to the speech in debate clause.[12]
The court also maintained that the commission still had authority in prosecuting legislators when engaged in activities other than "core legislative acts," but noted that the state constitution could be amended to provide the Ethics Commission with authority over core legislative acts, saying the following:[12]
| “ |
We wish to emphasize that this decision is predicated on our respect for the speech-in-debate immunity-a right that is expressly guaranteed by our constitution and that is widely recognized in this country and most of the English-speaking world. Unquestionably, this right could be modified (or even obviated) by a sufficiently explicit constitutional amendment-but we perceive no such explicitness in the language of the 1986 Ethics Amendment. If the citizens of Rhode Island wish to empower the Ethics Commission to investigate and prosecute legislators with respect to their legislative actions, notwithstanding the operation of the speech in debate clause, they most certainly have the power to do so.[1] |
” |
Path to the ballot
A majority vote in both chambers of the Rhode Island Legislature was required to refer the amendment to the ballot. On June 16, 2016, both the Rhode Island House of Representatives and the Rhode Island Senate unanimously approved the measure.[13][14]
House vote
June 16, 2016
| Rhode Island H 8189 House vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 73 | 100.00% | ||
| No | 0 | 0.00% | ||
Senate vote
June 16, 2016
| Rhode Island H 8189 Senate Vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
| Yes | 38 | 100.00% | ||
| No | 0 | 0.00% | ||
State profile
| Demographic data for Rhode Island | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rhode Island | U.S. | |
| Total population: | 1,055,607 | 316,515,021 |
| Land area (sq mi): | 1,034 | 3,531,905 |
| Race and ethnicity** | ||
| White: | 81.1% | 73.6% |
| Black/African American: | 6.5% | 12.6% |
| Asian: | 3.2% | 5.1% |
| Native American: | 0.5% | 0.8% |
| Pacific Islander: | 0% | 0.2% |
| Two or more: | 2.8% | 3% |
| Hispanic/Latino: | 13.6% | 17.1% |
| Education | ||
| High school graduation rate: | 86.2% | 86.7% |
| College graduation rate: | 31.9% | 29.8% |
| Income | ||
| Median household income: | $56,852 | $53,889 |
| Persons below poverty level: | 17.3% | 11.3% |
| Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in Rhode Island. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here. | ||
Presidential voting pattern
Rhode Island voted for the Democratic candidate in all seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.
Pivot Counties (2016)
Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, one is located in Rhode Island, accounting for 0.5 percent of the total pivot counties.[15]
Pivot Counties (2020)
In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. Rhode Island had one Boomerang Pivot County, 4.00 percent of all Boomerang Pivot Counties.
More Rhode Island coverage on Ballotpedia
- Elections in Rhode Island
- United States congressional delegations from Rhode Island
- Public policy in Rhode Island
- Endorsers in Rhode Island
- Rhode Island fact checks
- More...
Recent news
The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms Rhode Island ethics commission amendment 2016. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.
See also
Footnotes
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source. Cite error: Invalid
<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content Cite error: Invalid<ref>tag; name "quotedisclaimer" defined multiple times with different content - ↑ 2.0 2.1 State of Rhode Island General Assembly, "2016 -- H 8189 SUBSTITUTE A," May 10, 2016
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Open States, "HR 8189," accessed July 13, 2016
- ↑ Common Cause Rhode Island, "Ethics," accessed August 19, 2016
- ↑ League of Women Voters Rhode Island, "The Rhode Island Voter," accessed August 19, 2016
- ↑ Operation Clean Government, "Tuesday (05/17/16) Hearing on Ethics Commission," May 17, 2016
- ↑ CLEAN RI, "Home," accessed August 19, 2016
- ↑ Providence Journal, "H. Philip West Jr.: To cut corruption, pass Question 2," August 8, 2016
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Rhode Island Board of Elections, "ERTS," accessed November 3, 2016
- ↑ Rhode Island Ethics Commission, "Ethics Commission History," accessed August 18, 2016
- ↑ National Conference of State Legislatures Center for Ethics in Government, "Legislative Immunity and Separation of Powers: Implications from Irons v. The Rhode Island Ethics Commission and Commission on Ethics v Hardy," accessed August 18, 2016
- ↑ 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 FindLaw, "Irons v. Rhode Island Ethics Commission," accessed August 19, 2016
- ↑ Rhode Island House of Representatives, "Sequence No. 469," June 16, 2016
- ↑ Rhode Island Senate, "Sequence No. 590," June 16, 2016
- ↑ The raw data for this study was provided by Dave Leip of Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections.
 |
State of Rhode Island Providence (capital) |
|---|---|
| Elections |
What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures |
| Government |
Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy |
