As campaigns and elections continue to evolve, it becomes more difficult to determine which information is important, which information is relevant and which information is accurate. At Project Vote Smart, the goal is to present factual information without political bias.

The non-profit, non-partisan organization tracks and researches countless pieces of legislation, financial and polling data related to candidacies at all levels. The organization has some paid staff members, but is largely run by volunteers and interns combing through data and making it available to the public.

From the site, “In essence, what Project Vote Smart’s interns and volunteers have done is ensure that tolerance will no longer be the only option available to the millions of us who are tormented by the issueless rhetoric and often misleading attacks that define contemporary American politics.”

Project Vote Smart was founded by a group of legislators, educators and political activists that include President Jimmy Carter, President Gerald Ford, Senator Barry Goldwater and Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro. The organization is still governed by a board of directors from various political ideologies. In order to join the board, a member must also recruit a member from an opposing political view.

Project Vote Smart has a number of ways to stay connected and follow along as the campaign season begins to get into full swing. Enjoy getting to know the government officials that represent you, and have a great weekend.

During an interview aired last night with ABC News Robin Roberts President Barack Obama expressed his personal support for same-sex marriage. The news broke when ABC news leaked portions of the interview yesterday afternoon.

“At a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.” Obama told Roberts in the interview.

The admission comes after Vice President Joe Biden set off a media firestorm with comments he made during an interview with David Gregory on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday. Additionally, on Tuesday, North Carolina voters approved a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union between a man and a woman.

While the President has personally come out in support of same-sex marriage, he told Roberts that he still believes the issue should be decided by the states and not at the federal level. Sources told the Associated Press the President was under increasing pressure from supporters and donors who threatened to withhold funds from the pro-Obama Super PAC, Priorities USA, without clarification from the President of his positions on same-sex marriage.

Following the announcement, Republican Party Presidential candidate Mitt Romney stated to KOCO in Oklahoma City “I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.”

While the issue will likely not be heavily debated in the coming months of the general election, the announcement is historic as it is the first time a sitting president or presidential nominee from either major political party has come out in support of same-sex marriage.

As the general presidential election begins, swing states will start to receive more attention from the candidates and national media. This week, our highlighted site focuses on the latest polling data of three major swing states from Quinnipiac University.

Quinnipiac conducted a survey from April 25 – May 1 of registered voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. These three states were targeted as no candidate since 1960 has won the White House without winning at least two of them.

When asked: “Turning to this year’s general election for president, if the election for President were being held today, and the candidates were Barack Obama the Democrat and Mitt Romney the Republican, for whom would you vote?”

• Florida: Mitt Romney 44% – Barack Obama 43% (1,169 voters, margin of error +/- 2.9%)
• Ohio: Barack Obama 44% – Mitt Romney 42% (1,130 voters, margin of error +/- 2.9%)
• Pennsylvania: Barack Obama 47% – Mitt Romney 39% (1,168 voters, margin of error +/- 2.9%)

Clearly the race is just beginning to heat up as both Florida and Ohio are within the statistical margin of error. Look for the candidates to start spending significant time and money in both of these states as well as a number of other swing states.

Check out the site for complete polling data including favorability ratings, voter opinions on the economy and which candidate for Vice President voters would most like to see Mitt Romney choose. You can also download crosstabs and demographic summaries for each poll and parse the data as deeply as you would like.

Have a great weekend!

Q. Some of the state lobbying reports ask about my travel expenses. What does this include?

A. “Travel expenses” is a phrase used by several states. It can refer to two different types of expenditures.

Some states require the disclosure of personal, reimbursed expenses incurred while lobbying. This would include food and beverage, hotels, cab fare, and travel expenses for a lobbying trip. Iowa, for instance, requires lobbyist employers to disclose all reimbursements made to their lobbyists. So, if a lobbyist lives in Topeka and flies to Des Moines to communicate with a legislator, the airfare is a reportable expense. Note, however, this generally only applies if the primary purpose of the trip is lobbying as defined by the state. A trip during which the lobbying contacts made were incidental to the main purpose of the travel would usually not need reported.

Other states, however, require the reporting of airfare or other travel costs paid by a lobbyist on behalf of a legislator or other public official. In Idaho and Mississippi, for example, a lobbyist or lobbyist employer may pay for a public official to travel to an event or to the company’s facilities, and the cost of the travel must be reported.

In all of these cases, the state reports request “travel expenses.” As you can see, it is very possible for the same words to have different meanings in the eyes of different states. When in doubt, lobbyists and employers can always contact us for guidance.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

State and Federal Communications is proud to be a founding member of the Greater Akron Chamber of Commerce Young Professionals Network (YPN).

As a consistent supporter of the city of Akron and the economic growth of the region, State and Federal Communications is strengthening its commitment by becoming a part of the Chamber’s re-launch of this valuable program.

According to the chambers website, “The Greater Akron Chamber is committed to making an impact on the retention and attraction of talent in the greater Akron area. We believe that by connecting our region’s YPs to each other and to our community, we will be better able to accomplish that goal. The mission of the YPN is to attract and retain talent to the Greater Akron region by connecting the next generation of leaders to each other and to the community.”

The YPN hosts quarterly networking events as well as programs geared towards personal and professional development. By offering benefits available exclusively to YPN members and opportunities to take ownership in the community, the program will support a new crop of leaders and strengthen the economic development of the greater Akron area.

State and Federal Communications is proud to be a part of the Greater Akron Chamber of Commerce, and a founding member of the Young Professionals Network.

Jon Spontarelli is a member of the Young Professional Network and the primary contact from State and Federal Communications.

Q.  I am a registered lobbyist who would like to attend a charitable golf tournament.  Are there specific restrictions or requirements for this type of event?

A. Mere attendance at a charitable golf tournament or similar event is not typically restricted.

However, this activity may be prohibited or subject to disclosure requirements depending on the circumstances.

Being a registered lobbyist does not hinder your ability to donate independently to a 501(c)(3) organization.  However, in some instances, your attendance may be requested because the event is associated with a public official.  If an official asks you to attend or sponsor the charitable event, this may be considered making a contribution “at the behest of” the official, depending on the laws in your jurisdiction.

If a charitable contribution is made “at the behest of” a public official, there are two considerations: permissibility and disclosure.  First, is the charitable contribution permissible?  A jurisdiction may consider the charitable contribution to be a gift to the public official who requested it.  For example, Massachusetts considers a charitable contribution in this scenario to be a prohibited gift.  Even if the charitable contribution is a permissible gift, there may be a limit as to how much a lobbyist may donate.

Second, if a lobbyist may make the charitable contribution, is it disclosed on a lobbying report?  In Illinois, these charitable contributions are not reportable on a lobbying report.  In California, the official who made the request of the lobbyist must disclose the charitable contribution.  However, this type of expenditure is reportable on a lobbying report in Connecticut.

If you are a registered lobbyist, check with the applicable state regulatory agency before making a charitable contribution “at the behest of” an official.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

The Ethics and Petitioning Commission of OZ has opened an investigation into the activities of Ms. Dorothy Gale following a complaint by Citizens for an Ethical Oz (CEO), which alleges Ms. Gale not only failed to register with the commission prior to petitioning the Wizard of Oz, but committed acts of bribery, violated Oz’s gifts laws, used public money and property for personal gain, and failed to report agreements made to petition on behalf of others.

Its complaint alleges Ms. Gale and the Wizard entered a quid pro quo contract trading use of the state-owned hot air balloon for the Wicked Witch of the West’s broomstick. This same contract also provided Ms. Gales’ companions—who had contracted with her to petition the Wizard on their behalf—with intellect, courage, and a heart. Additionally, Ms. Gale and her companions received the use of state funds illegally when they received full make overs by city employees. CEO contends it does not matter Ms. Gale was unable to utilize the hot air balloon, but merely the formation of the contract alone is in violation of petitioning statutes.

CEO leader Ambrose Smythe points out that when Ms. Gale made her agreement with the Wizard, she was under investigation in Munchkinland for destruction of private property, manslaughter, impersonation of a magical being, and grand theft of ruby slippers. Additionally, when Ms. Gale fled the Land of Oz, she was under further investigation for theft and murder by authorities in the West lands.

“I would like to believe Ms. Gale was merely a young girl who didn’t know any better,” Smythe said, “but this can’t even be called a good April Fools story.”

Photo of the ruby slippers by RadioFan on Wikipedia.

April 15-17, 2012  NASPO 2012 – How to Market to State Governments Meeting, Orlando, Florida

April 16-17, 2012  National Summit on Strategic Communications, Washington, D.C.

April 17-18, 2012 Public Affairs Council Spring Executive Board Meeting, Washington, D.C.

April 19, 2012 Kent State University, Washington Program in National Issues, Washington, D.C.

April 19-20, 2012 Campaigns & Elections Tech Conference, Washington, D.C.

April 27-29, 2012  Greek American Foundation – National Innovation Conference, New York, NY

May 2-4, 2012 Ohio State Bar Association Annual Convention, Cincinnati, OH

May 17-20, 2012  CSG Spring Leadership Conference, LaQuinta, CA

May 21-23, 2012  U.S. Chamber of Commerce Small Business Summit, Washington, D.C.

Q.  As an organization employing in-house lobbyists, what expenditures am I required to capture for inclusion in the aggregate dollar amount reported on my quarterly Federal LD-2 report?

A. There are a variety of expenditures that Federal registrants are required to track and report in an effort to provide a good faith estimate of their activity.  These expenditures include:

• Compensation, expenses and overhead associated with “registered” lobbyist employee activity.  For Federal purposes, a “registered” lobbyist is an individual who meets the statutory definition of a lobbyist and is listed by name on the LD-2 report;
• Compensation, expenses and overhead associated with any non-lobbyist employee who engaged in lobbying activity during the quarter (even though they do not meet the statutory definition of lobbyist).  Their names are not listed on the report, but the value of their activity is included;
• Dues paid to an association or membership organization during the quarter that are attributable to lobbying.  This amount is typically a percentage of the overall payments made to the membership organization and is ascertained by speaking with the outside entity directly.  Importantly, dues payments for lobbying activities should be included in the estimate for the quarter in which they are paid and cannot be apportioned over a longer period of time;
• Retainers/fees incurred during the quarter to outside consultants/firms for lobbying activities.  These fees are required to be included during the quarter in which they are incurred regardless of whether billing or payment has been made.

If we can be of assistance in helping to identify reportable expenditures, please let us know.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

March 7, 2012  Ohio’s Birthday Party, Washington, D.C.

March 15, 2012  Greater Akron Chamber Annual Meeting, Akron, Ohio

March 21-23, 2012  SGAC Annual Meeting, Boston, Massachusetts

April 15-17, 2012  NASPO 2012 – How to Market to State Governments Meeting, Orlando, Florida

April 16-17, 2012  National Summit on Strategic Communications, Washington, D.C.

April 27-29, 2012  Greek American Foundation – National Innovation Conference, New York, NY

February 7, 2012     NCSL Foundation Bi-Annual Luncheon, Washington, D.C.

February 17, 2012     Innovate to Motivate, Washington, D.C.

February 25 – February 27, 2012     National Governors Association Winter Meeting, Washington, D.C.

February 27 – March 1, 2012     National PAC Conference, Miami, Florida

Q:  Can I change the method by which I am calculating my lobbying expenditures for purposes of filing my Federal  LD-2 reports?

A:  Yes, at the appropriate time.  Under the LDA, registrants have the option of electing the compilation method for quarterly expenditures – that is, whether they use the LDA definitions or the IRC definitions for lobbying.  A change in that method election can only take place, however, in the first quarter of each new year.  Once a report has been filed using one method then all subsequent reports for that reporting year must employ the same method.  That being the case, this is a very good time to consider whether it makes sense to change.  There are advantages and disadvantages to each method and the decision to change your method should be made after careful consideration.  Here are just a few important differences to keep in mind when considering a new method election for 2012:

• The IRC method allows an organization to employ only one tracking system for both tax and LDA purposes;
• The IRC method provides a greatly narrowed definition of communications with executive branch officials;
• Under the LDA method, neither grassroots nor state and local lobbying expenditures are included.

If you think it may make sense to consider a change in your calculating method, please let us know and we’d be happy to assist in a more thorough analysis.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

The practical result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 21, 2010, Citizens United decision allows corporations, labor unions, and others to make independent expenditures and electioneering communications regarding candidates without restrictions.

We are approaching the second anniversary of Citizens United. We said at the time of the decision the biggest impact would come when states chose to react – or not react – to the decision. We have tracked what the states are doing – whether the state has passed new laws, clarified existing laws, or has bills pending.

Be sure to take a look at the essential and up-to-date report we have made available on our website regarding how the states are reacting to Citizens United.