An Act to close travel loophole in the state conflict of interest law, and to provide for greater transparency and accountability regarding travel gifts
Take action
Take a stance or write a position on this measure.
Create an account to take a stance, submit a written position, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This bill aims to address a loophole in Massachusetts’ conflict of interest law regarding travel. It seeks to increase transparency and accountability when state officials receive travel gifts, ensuring greater scrutiny and preventing potential conflicts of interest. The legislation intends to close gaps in current regulations related to travel expenses and gifts received by public officials.
Key provisions
- Requires disclosure of travel arrangements and associated expenses for state officials.
- Establishes guidelines for accepting travel gifts from companies doing business with the state.
- Defines ‘travel gifts’ more broadly to encompass a wider range of benefits.
- Mandates reporting of travel gifts to the state ethics commission.
- Creates a process for investigating potential conflicts of interest related to travel.
- Requires state agencies to develop and implement policies regarding travel gifts.
- Clarifies the definition of ‘official’ for purposes of conflict of interest laws.
- Establishes penalties for violations of the new rules.
Who is affected
- State officials and employees
- Businesses contracting with the Commonwealth
- The State Ethics Commission
- The General Court
- The public
Notable changes
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
4 on record
Primary sponsor
Cosponsors
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours