75 Comments

Jeff, ask your followers to call their house member to alert them to the bill and ask them for their support. Make certain we have the bill number. Ask us to call our senators and ask for their support too. If you have a Senate companion bill lined up, let us know.

We can move this ... 700,000 followers on tiktok can help get it done!

Expand full comment

Jeff needs you on his AG campaign staff!

Expand full comment

Just subscribed to your Substack 👍.

Expand full comment

North Carolina, heck, America, needs you and Josh Stein!!!

Expand full comment

Jeff,

Please take a look at House Joint Resolution 54, the first step toward an amendment that would overturn the infamous Supreme Court decisions Citizens United vs, Federal Election Commission (2010), which ruled that money is "free speech," as well as the infamous Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad decision (1886), which ruled that a corporation has the same rights as a person, even though corporations also have limited liability and other advantages that ordinary people completely lack (like access to a good lawyer). HJR has 86 co-sponsors so far and of course all of them are Democrats, but the only North Carolina congressperson who is a co-sponsor so far is Alma Adams. Please consider becoming a co-sponsor of this bill before you retire from the Congress to become the next Attorney General of North Carolina. Getting three-fourths of the states to agree will be a challenge, but with someone like Tim Walz as the next VP he may be able to convince the some of the legislators in the Republican state state assemblies to agree to vote for this. Most ordinary folks (Democrats, Republicans, and Independents) would agree that money is NOT free speech and that corporations are NOT really people and should not have MORE privileges than people. This may also help make your job as attorney general a lot easier.

Expand full comment

Just one point of clarification: he's not retiring from Congress to become AG. The North Carolina legislature redrew the district map (i.e., gerrymandering) to eliminate his seat.

Expand full comment

Accurate detail, but the word "retire" was a deliberate understatement of a political reality of our times to move on to the main points I wanted to make in this one particular post. Gerrymandering has been with us for a very long time and Jeff was not the first victim and will probably not be the last.

Expand full comment

And here is a copy of H.J.Res.54: https://www.movetoamend.org/amendment

Expand full comment

Jeff, Thank you for the newsletter and more so for your service. One important point of clarification. The S. Court did NOT say that "bribes" paid after an act are legal. I know; the press and internet say differently, and it s certainly a catchy headline; but it is not true. What the S. Ct. DID say was that the current law (18 USC 666) that applies to state and local officials is written to only makes true "bribes" illegal. A bribe requires an agreement to exchange "this for that"; I give you money you give me a government contract, or a vote or something only an elected official in your place can give. It doesn't matter when the bribe is paid; before or after the official act; as long as the parties agreed to give the bribe to cause the official act. That is the traditional quid pro quo that has been the definition of "bribe" for a couple millennia (hence the Latin). What the S. Ct. said in the Snyder case is that a gratuity: a reward paid after a government action, is not a bribe unless there was a quid pro quo agreement before the official act took place. You and I never communicate but you pass a law I like. I give you a campaign contribution, or hire you as my lawyer or accountant or whatever. That is a gratuity, not a bribe, because I didn't get you to pas the law by agreeing to pay you. I just rewarded you for doing it (probably hoping you will do something similar in the future).You can (and I personally think should) amend the law to make most gratuities illegal for state and local officials (they already are, under a different law, for federal officials). But the current law as written only makes bribes illegal, not gratuities. Snyder got the law right. Paying a gratuity may be bad, but letting people be prosecuted for things that are not in the statute is worse. Governments where prosecutors make up the law as they go are no one's idea of just. Be well.

Expand full comment

What is appalling is that someone apparently didn’t read the Snyder decision before proposing legislation. Reading the source document is critical to making an informed opinion.

God knows, we already have too many laws, regulations (that changed on a whim under Chevron), and penalties without adding more uninformed legislation.

Justice Gorsuch recently noted

guesstimates: that U.S. statutory law runs to 60,000 pages, with another 188,000 pages of regulations, which delineate 300,000 criminal sanctions, while imposing on the American people 9.8 billion man-hours of paperwork each year.

Expand full comment

I agree that there are too many laws and regulations; some serious effort at making the whole body of law easier to understand and clearer is long overdue. But understanding S. Ct. opinions and the many laws they sometimes rely on is tough business. As I mentioned in my earlier post, the media really misrepresented what the Snyder case said. I saw many intelligent and thoughtful people get it wrong. But the good news is that it is all still written down and serious people like Jeff and his staff can read it over again and then make good plans as to how, or if, they think the law needs to be amended.

Expand full comment

And so long as the Mayor reported this gratuity payment on his tax returns, I suppose he’s out of the woods altogether. That said, I would expect his political career to be over but who can really say these days.

Expand full comment

That makes sense. Thank you for a clear explanation.

Expand full comment

You are very welcome. As I say above, I think there should be a gratuities law thatclearly defines what is legal and illegal, so there is a place for the law Jeff and his folks are contemplating. I wish him luck.

Expand full comment

I forgot to mention --- if your connections haven't registered to vote yet or need to update their registration, encourage them to visit my Substack (Information Bank). I'm an elections expert and I've been loading up my Substack (and will continue to do so through the election) with all sorts of voter education materials. Links to all the state voter registration websites are up ... ditto for links to all state election officials. I just posted a state-by-state breakout of the key races on the ballot this November. Between now and mid-October, I will post detailed state-by-state guides to voting. The Texas one is already up. Look for more to follow.

And a final note Jeff ... thanks for being a great Member of Congress. You remind me of what life in politics used to be like ... we need to bring that back.

Expand full comment

Thanks for all your work about voting. There are a lot of threats to voting now with insidious laws that disenfranchise voters unexpectedly so it’s important to have state by state info handy.

Expand full comment
Aug 8·edited Aug 8

Nice work on the bill. One thing you may need clarification on is if there's a statute of limitations post congressional career. Get a bill passed that benefits a pharmaceutical, don't run for re-election, get hired by said company, get a $5 million bonus. Is that bribery?

Expand full comment

I just made this post on LinkedIn. Hope it helps!

"North Carolina Congressman Jeff Jackson just wrote about a bill he's drafted to close a loophole in the nation's laws against bribery of government officials. This is a "no brainer" bill to pass so let's all be good citizen lobbyists and help him out!

1) Read his post.

2) Call your Member of the House and ask them to support the Congressman's bill. If we don't have a bill number, just describe the content. Make certain you mention the Congressman and his District, 14th District, NC, https://lnkd.in/g_GmjAqy. That should get the staff to staff contact rolling.

3) Then dial up your US Senators and suggest that this is a good bill for them to cosponsor.

4) Drop a note to your local media outlets suggesting that this is a bipartisan initiative that should pass easily. No one should be in favor of bribery, right?

5) Remember to check your voter registration and/or register to vote this November. Democracy - it's a great thing. Let's preserve it."

If you're on LinkedIn, the original post will be found here ... https://www.linkedin.com/in/asksharonlawrence/

Expand full comment

Jeff, I'm going to miss you so much as my representative! I hope you can figure out a way to do an email newsletter or something as our new Attorney General to keep every one informed about the honest and hard work you do for North Carolinians every day!

Expand full comment

Thanks for the promised follow up. Great pics! Also, thanks for the heads up on the loophole and the attempt to close it, simply because we know not what individuals discuss in private, and then reap the rewards for basically being a national, public thief; sort of like "insider trading".

Expand full comment

Thank you for everything you do. We're supporting you here in NC for AG!

Expand full comment

There are some great Pearls Before Swine comic strips on the subject of campaign finance/contributions/bribes. I don’t seem to be able to paste images or links here. Some dates to look for are 8/24/2014, 9/15/2023, 10/8/2023, 3/5/2023, 5/5/2024, 10/27/2012, 9/25/2022, 1/7/2024. There are probably more.

Expand full comment
deletedAug 8
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
deletedAug 8
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Rat has probably called him pasty.

Expand full comment

I live in Ohio. I love Jeff's emails. In his new one he tells us he's gonna introduce a bill to close a bribery loophole created by the Supreme Court. Good for Jeff! So I sent a donation. Go for it!

Expand full comment

Nice work, and kudos to your staff. I think the only ways to fix the egregious Supreme Court rulings are thru legislation or by overturning them, which likely requires a challenge to legislation. It's mind-boggling that the Supreme Court could say that a quid pro quo is illegal but a quo pro quid is not.

Expand full comment

With this Supreme Court it’s not all that surprising.

Expand full comment

I hope your bill includes 'tip' as well as 'gratuity." Any money that changes hands before or after should be called a bribe.

Thank you.

Expand full comment

Your daughter is growing up do fast! We are behind you!

Expand full comment

In order:

1) Happy anniversary, best wishes for many more.

2) Purely coincidental, I'm sure, that the section of the U.S. Code being amended to close the bribery loophole is 666.

3) I'm calling my notional representative, Ann Wagner, this afternoon to suggest strongly that she support it. The most recent accusees of this sort of behavior in the area are Democrats so there's a chance she'll take some positive action for a change. She's also got a fairly strong opponent in November so we're hoping for the best.

Expand full comment

666 👿. That is ironic.

Expand full comment