[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 8728-8729]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    STATE ETHICS LAW PROTECTION ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Quigley) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to announce my reintroduction 
of the State Ethics Law Protection Act. At a time when indictments and 
allegations of ethics violations of our elected leaders have become all 
too common, now more than ever we must use every tool at our disposal 
to fight corruption.
  Unfortunately, the Federal Government is currently preventing 
numerous States from using one of the most important tools we have to 
fight cronyism, corruption, and waste. My home State of Illinois, which 
is no stranger to these issues, along with several other States around 
the country, has taken a stand against corruption by passing laws to 
eliminate shady pay-to-play contracting.
  Pay-to-play politics is the practice of trading campaign 
contributions for lucrative government contracts. Pay-to-play practices 
erode the integrity of our public works projects and allow individuals 
to profit at the expense of American taxpayers. It is the most common 
example of government corruption.
  Fortunately, it is also one of the easiest to solve. Anti-pay-to-play 
laws are designed to ensure that the competitive bidding process for 
government contracts is open and fair, not rigged or otherwise biased 
by lining the campaign pockets of those responsible for awarding the 
contracts.
  Amazingly, a loophole created in a previous administration in the 
Federal Highway Administration's contracting requirements is making it 
difficult, if not impossible, for States to implement these 
anticorruption laws. The Federal Government has threatened to cut off 
highway funds to any State that passes an anti-pay-to-play law. The 
Highway Administration's competitive bidding requirements have been 
interpreted to mean that States can't weed out corrupt contractors.
  Clearly, this was not the intent of Congress when it passed these 
requirements. That is why I'm reintroducing the State Ethics Law 
Protection Act. This important measure simply amends the Federal 
Highway Administration's contracting requirements to allow States to 
pass these important laws. It ensures States that do pass 
anticorruption laws do not face financial penalties for doing so.
  It is time for us to make it clear that Congress supports the right 
of States to fight corruption as they see fit. States have the right to 
ensure their contracting conforms to the highest ethical standards and 
offers the best value to taxpayers. It is not the Federal Highway 
Administration's place to second-guess a State on how to best

[[Page 8729]]

ethically award contracts. States like Connecticut, New Jersey, South 
Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Kentucky have all passed laws like Illinois 
to root out this kind of blatant corruption.
  These States should be applauded, not punished, for doing the right 
thing. By amending the Federal Highway Administration's contracting 
requirements, we can ensure that States have every tool at their 
disposal to encourage transparency and accountability. Our States have 
shown they are ready to reform. It is now our duty to ensure they have 
the ability to implement these reforms.
  I am often asked what the true cost of corruption is. I will tell 
you, in my view, coming from Illinois, it is the loss of the public's 
trust. We cannot lead without this trust. And at this critical 
juncture, we must do all we can to restore trust and inspire the 
confidence of people across this country.

                          ____________________