LOBBYING REFORM UPDATE


ETHICS REFORM
Senate Begins Consideration of Lobby Reform

By Thomas Ferraro Mon Mar 6, 2006 www.reuters.com

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate began consideration of legislation on Monday that would require lobbyists to disclose more about their activities and ban gifts by lobbyists to members of Congress and staff.

The measure, which has strong bipartisan support in the wake of scandals that rocked the Republican-led Congress, would also impose stiff fines for violation of lobbying curbs.

The Senate hopes to complete action after voting on a long list of possible amendments later this week. They include one that would deny congressional pensions to lawmakers convicted of accepting bribes.

That proposal was inspired largely by the case of former Republican U.S. Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California, who was sentenced last week to eight years and four months in jail for accepting $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors.

Ethics reform became a top priority after lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty in January in a wide-ranging public corruption case. He is now cooperating with prosecutors and the probe may reach a number of lawmakers.

Members on both sides of the political aisle have demanded reform, saying lawmakers need to clean up Congress and reverse polls that show declining confidence in political leaders.

But some Democrats have blamed much of the recent ethical woes on a Republican "culture of corruption," and hope to use it to gain advantage in the November congressional elections.

"America deserves a government as good as its people," said Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, said, "The American people expect us to work together to develop meaningful bipartisan solutions."

"We are obligated to protect the integrity of this great institution, and, most importantly, to represent the genuine interests of the voters who sent us here," Frist said.

The legislation before the Senate is the product of bills produced last week on bipartisan votes by two committees.

The Republican-led House of Representatives is expected to produce legislation of its own in coming weeks.


A Start on Lobbying Reform

Monday, March 6, 2006; A14 www.washingtonpost.com

THIS WEEK the Senate plans to take up lobbying reform, melding two measures that would be an improvement on the current system of inadequate disclosure and lax rules. But the measures that emerged from two Senate committees last week don't go nearly far enough to fix the abuses that got the attention of the public -- and therefore lawmakers -- in the first place. The floor debate will feature a package of critical amendments on strengthening enforcement, cracking down on the cut-rate use of corporate aircraft, and imposing limits on gifts and travel -- in all, giving senators a chance to produce a truly significant lobbying reform measure for the House to act on.

Especially in the area of disclosure, the proposals from the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the Rules Committee would be a significant, though far from perfect, advance over the status quo. The governmental affairs measure would require lobbying firms to report what they spend on the fast-growing area of grass-roots lobbying -- that is, ginning up citizens to contact lawmakers -- which has previously been exempted by disclosure rules.

Disclosure would be more frequent and more detailed, including, for example, more details about travel itineraries and participants; reporting of lobbyists' contributions to lawmakers' charities or events honoring them; and gifts from lobbyists. Still, there are serious omissions, particularly the failure to require lobbyists to provide information about what congressional or executive branch offices they lobbied.

And disclosure alone isn't adequate. The measures would allow lawmakers to continue to fly the corporate skies, using company aircraft with on-board lobbyists while paying far less than the true cost of such flights; this should be prohibited, not just disclosed. Similarly, neither measure does enough to clamp down on travel funded by companies or other entities with interests before Congress. The governmental affairs bill would still permit lawmakers to accept gifts from lobbyists such as tickets to sporting events; there's no excuse for letting elected officials accept such freebies.

The biggest disappointment is the failure of a majority on the governmental affairs committee to support the call by the chairman and the ranking Democrat, Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Joseph I. Lieberman (Conn.), to create a stronger enforcement mechanism to police abuses by both lawmakers and lobbyists. The pair wanted a new Office of Public Integrity, which would review documents, accept outside complaints, refer matters to the Justice Department, conduct investigations and make recommendations to the House and Senate ethics committees. The ultimate decision about whether rules had been violated and whether punishment should be imposed would remain up to the ethics committees. That's as it should be.

But it's no attack on the dedication or integrity of lawmakers with the misfortune to serve on the ethics committees to say that the current system inevitably tends toward complacency and partisan gridlock. When the issue comes up again on the Senate floor, senators should remember: Real lobbying reform requires changes not just in the rules but in making certain they are enforced.


Lobbyists have rights too
By Boston Herald editorial staff
Sunday, March 5, 2006

Washington lobbyists are in such bad odor these days that one senator even wants to put a curse on them, restricting their legislative activities, if they should - in their next life - get themselves elected to the Senate.

    The Senate Rules Committee refused to take up the proposal, but the idea is so bad it’s bound to come up again in that spawning ground of terrible ideas called the U.S. Senate - especially in an age when lobbyists are blamed for everything down to hangnails.

    Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) is a former member of the House who was a lobbyist for a small railroad in South Dakota before that. After Thune was elected to the Senate in 2004, he continued to try to help the railroad (which says it no longer pays him), and succeeded in winning a provision that raised the amount that the Federal Railroad Administration could lend from $3.5 billion to $35 billion, with $7 billion set aside for small railroads. That permitted the one-time lobbying client, the Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad, to apply for a $2.5 billion loan for a major expansion, which is now pending at the FRA.

     ‘‘It’s the most despicable special-interest deal I’ve ever seen in all my 30 years in government,” said Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.). He proposed that lobbyists who become senators be barred for two years from working ‘‘personally and substantially” on matters involving former clients.

    Dayton is over the top. Paying a member to work on your issue is bribery and already a crime. But as long as the lobbyist’s work is generally known to the voters, how can the Senate or the House forbid a member from working on anything he or she wants? In effect, that’s depriving constituents of representation.

    A loan to the DM&E is a bad deal on different grounds: If a new rail line is really needed, it should make money and investment banks should be happy to help finance it.

    And, of course, all of this silliness just skirts the real issue - those special-interest earmarks in congressional budgeting. Hey, can’t go there!


Lobbyist turf wars can steal attention from policy issues

Florida legislators open their annual session Tuesday with an election-year agenda packed with special- interest bills that could be overshadowed by hurricane recovery.


Posted on Sun, Mar. 05, 2006 meklas@MiamiHerald.com

When Florida lawmakers begin their annual session Tuesday, they will tackle an election-year agenda loaded with important topics -- many of them important mostly to the most powerful lobbies in Florida.

A sampling:

• They will wade into a feud between the National Rifle Association and the Florida Chamber of Commerce over the gun lobby's bill to allow employees to leave guns in their cars at work.

• They will fast-track a bill that is the priority of the business lobby -- and fiercely opposed by trial lawyers -- to repeal the legal doctrine that sometimes forces deep-pocketed companies to pay the bulk of damages even if their share of the blame is minor.

• And they'll pit wine shippers against distributors as they write rules for Internet wine sales.

''They spend a lot of time resolving turf wars between interest groups,'' observed Jason Watson, 24, a Florida State University law student and one of several college students on a nine-month stint as a legislative intern. ``There's not a lot that affects my life.''

Watson and other graduates made their observations last month to Miami Rep. Marco Rubio, designated to be the House leader next year.

Rubio agrees. ''Too often, interest groups have more power to control the agenda than they should have,'' he said.

Other legislative leaders dispute the view.

''Turf wars have gone on for 25 years and will probably go on for eternity,'' said House Speaker Allan Bense. ``While they may generate a lot of conversation, from a public policy perspective I don't spend a lot of time on them.''

TYPICAL AGENDA

Bense and Senate President Tom Lee described the agenda this session as typical for an election year, when lawmakers, eager to make time for issues designed to help their reelection campaigns, traditionally shy away from hard-to-settle policy wars in favor of interest-group disputes.

Lee conceded that while he will work to ``remain focused on policy, . . . this is a political process, so I would be shocked if there weren't political overtones to our policy considerations.''

Lee, who is seeking the Republican nomination for state chief financial officer, is one of several candidates for higher office serving in the Legislature this year.

State Rep. Randy Johnson of Celebration is Lee's opponent in the Republican primary.

GOVERNOR'S RACES

With Gov. Jeb Bush leaving office, an intense gubernatorial battle threatens to wind its way into much of the session.

The Republican candidates, Chief Financial Officer Tom Gallagher and Attorney General Charlie Crist, are both former legislators and know how to use the process.

Meanwhile, another legislator, state Sen. Rod Smith of Gainesville, is seeking the Democratic Party nomination, squaring off against U.S. Rep. Jim Davis of Tampa.

The legislative lineup in the GOP-dominated House and Senate includes proposals to approve the largest round of tax cuts yet -- $1.5 billion. The lawmakers will also take up a proposed constitutional amendment to restore school vouchers, a topic designed to draw conservative Republicans to the polls in November.

But the most challenging issues before lawmakers are the ones thrust onto their agenda by last year's hurricanes and the state's red-hot real-estate market.

Lee and Bense have made repairing the state's property-insurance market a priority after eight storms in two years drove many insurers out of Florida and nearly bankrupted the state-run insurance pool.

Both have asked their committees to find ways to persuade private companies to write new policies again and to figure out what to do about the deficit-ridden state-run insurer, Citizens Property Insurance.

''We're going to address it, whether it's an election year or not,'' said Bense, a Panama City Republican.

He acknowledged that solutions will be difficult to achieve because of the competing interests across the state.

''I'm conflicted,'' said Bense, a road builder and developer. ``I hear from a constituent who lives on the coast that his premiums are going up 100 percent, and then I get an e-mail from someone in the center of the state complaining about the 6.8 percent assessment he has to pay to cover folks that are building those crazy homes on the coast. Both have good points.''

The governor has asked lawmakers to put more money into hurricane preparation, including strengthening special-needs shelters and enhancing emergency-response plans.

UTILITY RATES

Among the decisions to be made: whether to require utilities like Florida Power & Light to shoulder the cost of hurricane recovery -- or allow them to pass the pain on to consumers, in the form of higher rates.

Rising real-estate prices have forced so many middle-income workers out of the housing market that legislators may reverse themselves and stop raiding the state account that helps pay for affordable workforce housing. Lawmakers will also consider ways to make it easier for developers to build low-cost housing in expensive areas of the state.

SALES-TAX RELIEF

The real-estate market has helped fuel an unprecedented $6 billion in surplus revenue, leading to several spend-happy proposals from lawmakers.

The House, for example, wants to declare a weeklong sales-tax holiday on all purchases valued at up to $5,000. The governor prefers the Democrats' proposal for a weeklong sales-tax holiday specifically for hurricane-related purchases and for a $100 tax rebate to homeowners.

In the midst of the debate will be the perpetual struggle between legislators and lobbyists over the price of access to power.

Lawmakers passed landmark legislation in December banning gifts and meals from lobbyists. Last month, lobbyists challenged the ban in court.

Now, Bense and Lee are watching as legislators turn to more than three dozen political campaign accounts, known as 527s, to pay for the meals and entertainment that lobbyists used to cover.

The irony: Lobbyists can steer unlimited amounts of campaign cash into those accounts. The only catch is that legislators must now publicly report them.

Bense has asked the House ethics committee to look into whether the state should increase the timing and detail of the reporting requirements.

Lee, who initiated the lobbyist reforms debate last year, is satisfied that the requirements in place are enough, but says that the new shift -- legislators using their political accounts for ''lifestyle enhancement'' -- serves to expose a problem he will monitor.

''We all pretty much expected this would happen,'' he said. ``It sends two messages: Look how much it is going on, or look at how much it must have been going on last year.''