Republican Senator Jake Knotts and Democratic Senator Vincent Sheheen have announced they are submitting a bill banning leadership PACs in the Senate. Leadership PACs normally may accept contributions from lobbyists and have different contribution amounts than other campaign accounts.

Senator Sheheen said, “I want to help restore voter’s trust in government. This bill is one step to make sure elected officials answer to the voters, not wealthy contributors.”

Currently there is no member of the Senate who has a Leadership PAC.

Starting July 1, those in Orange County, California who are seeking to influence county government will be required to register with the Board of Supervisors. Under the new law, county lobbyists must register within 10 days of commencing lobbying activity and renew these registrations annually.

The registration fee will be $75 for an initial registration and $50 for each annual renewal thereafter. Orange County is the largest municipality in the state without a system for monitoring and disclosing lobbying activity. The regulation does not apply to those lobbying on behalf of nonprofit organizations.

The State Ethics Commission has created a ‘Debtors’ page on its web site, posting the names of lobbyists, lobbyists’ principals, public officials and others who have failed to pay late filing penalties and enforcement fines. The commission hopes to use this publicly available consolidated listing to help ensure compliance with the registration and disclosure requirements under the campaign finance and lobbying laws of the state.

The penalties owed range from $732,400 all the way down to $10. The page includes contact information for anyone appearing in the list to arrange for payment.

Senator Michael G. Waddoups introduced a bill mandating training for all registered lobbyists. SB 251 requires the lieutenant governor to develop and maintain a training course for lobbyists and make the training available on the internet to both lobbyists and the public. The bill also includes a component to help lobbyists understand state campaign finance requirements.

Lobbyists would be required to complete the training course once a year. A lobbyist who does not complete the training required could face a $1,000 fine and suspension of their lobbying license.

Photo of Senator Waddoups courtesy of the Utah Senate Web site.

Q. As a registered lobbyist, am I allowed to make a personal political contribution to a general assembly member whom I might eventually lobby? Does it make a difference whether I am a constituent of the general assembly member? Is such a contribution reportable?

A. As is customary in the nature of government affairs work, the answer depends upon the state in which you are making the contribution. That means you need to check the rules and regulations on political contributions for each state before you make the contribution. Also, whether such contributions are permitted or reported depends upon the amount of the contribution.

Here are some relevant examples:

• Personal political contributions by a lobbyist are reportable in Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. In some instances, the reporting requirement extends to a member of the lobbyist’s immediate family also making a contribution.
• In Pennsylvania, a registered lobbyist making a personal political contribution must register and report in the same manner required of PACs.
• There is an absolute prohibition on personal political contributions by registered lobbyists in Connecticut and North Carolina.
• In South Carolina, lobbyists are prohibited from making contributions to a candidate or anyone acting on behalf of a candidate if the lobbyist engages in lobbying the public office or public body for which the candidate is seeking election.
• In California, lobbyists may not contribute to state candidates or officeholders, or their controlled committees, if registered to lobby the candidate or officeholder’s agency.
• In Alaska, a lobbyist may not make a contribution to a candidate for office in a district outside the lobbyist’s own voting district. This prohibition continues for one year after a lobbyist’s registration or renewed registration date. A lobbyist who contributes to a legislative candidate must file a report within 30 days after making the contribution.

Political contributions not otherwise prohibited by a registered lobbyist could nonetheless be prohibited based on the particular state’s pay-to-play laws. Also, always make sure there are no restrictions on making the contribution during the legislative session.

Finally, it bears repeating to check the laws in the particular state before you make the contribution.

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.

Senate Bill 69 would prohibit any lobbyist, principal of a lobbyist, client of a lobbyist, agent of a lobbyist, or political action committee on which a lobbyist sits from making political campaign contributions to the governor, lieutenant governor, or a member of the legislature.

This prohibition would be in effect during any time in which the legislature is in regular or special session.

The measure also defines terms pertinent to the language of the bill, including ‘contribution,’ ‘political action committee,’ and ‘principal of a lobbyist.’

The bill aims to reduce situations where actual or perceived conflicts of interest may be raised.

Satellite photo of Hawaii by NASA, posted on Wikipedia.

New York Assembly Bill 04933, which is currently before the Assembly Election Law Committee, seeks to impose disclosure requirements upon lobbyists who act as political consultants.

The bill defines political consultants as any person receiving compensation for providing professional services relating to advising clients on political activities, political advertising, campaign strategies, campaign publicity, or campaign management.

Political consultants would be required to disclose the identities, telephone numbers, and addresses of all clients.

New York Coat of Arms by One Salient Oversight on Wikipedia.

According to an article in the Indianapolis Star News, Sarah Nagy has been fired as Executive Director of the Indiana Lobby Registration Commission. Nagy had been put on leave since January.

The article states the board voted unanimously and gave no reason for the action.

For the full story, read: “Lobby group fires executive director” from the February 11 edition.

The House and Senate have passed identical bills, House Bill 1284 and Senate Bill 194, aimed at delaying a legislator’s ability to become a lobbyist upon leaving the legislature.

The measures, often referred to as “revolving door legislation,” prohibit any former member of the legislature from registering as a lobbyist until one year after the expiration of the term the legislator was elected to serve.

Each chamber will now review the other’s bill. Governor Mike Beebe is expected to sign the legislation once passed.

Photo of the Arkansas State Capitol Building by Stuart Seeger on Wikipedia.

The Tennessee Bureau of Ethics and Campaign Finance introduced new contribution limits for 2011-2012 to reflect increases in the Consumer Price Index.

The new limits include a biennial aggregate limit of $113,700 on contributions to State and Local candidates and PACs. Individuals may contribute no more than $44,800 to State and Local candidates and no more than $68,900 to all PACs (including parties) during the two year cycle.

Lobbyist gift limits have increased to $55 per event and lobbyist employers are limited to gifts with a cumulative value of $110 during a calendar year.

Here is a heads-up for those following lobbying news in Rhode Island. News Editor Stephen Beale wrote on GoLocalProv that Providence, Rhode Island could be the first city in the state to require lobbyists to register with city hall.

The new rules have sparked a debate between supporters of government transparency and accountability and those who do not wish to inhibit non-lobbying groups from interacting with government.

For the full article, go to “Providence Could Become First RI City to Regulate Lobbyists” on GoLocalProv.com.

Photo of the Providence City Hall by ctman987 on Wikipedia.

Senator James Arnold has introduced a bill which would require persons seeking business relationships with local jurisdictions and their agencies to register and report activity and expenditures as lobbyists, whether or not the local jurisdictions have ordinances dealing with lobbying. Senate Bill 0330 defines ‘business relationship’ to include pecuniary interest contracts and purchases with an agency with an aggregate value of at least $100,000.

The bill calls for the reporting to be filed with the local county clerks where the lobbying activity occurs. A $100 a day late fine would be imposed for each day a lobbyist misses his or her filing date and lobbyists knowingly failing to register or file would face a Class A infraction.

The bill also allows local jurisdictions to adopt ethics ordinances and establish ethics commissions.

Map of Indiana by Jim Irwin on Wikipedia.

Jim Sedor, editor of News You Can Use, pointed out this article – “Lobbyist for San Manuel Tribe Fined $30,000 by State” from Tuesday’s Riverside Press-Enterprise.

According to the article, lobbyist Frank Molina of Strategic Solutions Advisors was fined $30,000 by the California Fair Political Practices Commission for failing to file lobbying reports. The article states Molina has lobbied for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, both operating casinos.

News You Can Use is State and Federal Communications’ weekly summary of national news focused on ethics, lobbying, and campaign finance.

The special session, called by Governor Riley in late December, lasted seven days and saw the passage of several landmark bills, each of which was promptly signed into law.

The most dramatic change concerning lobbyists is the newly enacted expenditure limits.  Previously, lobbyists could spend anything on an official without having to report it until the spending exceeded $250 per day.  Now, lobbyists may only spend $25 on an official for a meal with an annual limit of $150.  For a lobbyist’s employer, the limit is $50 per meal with a $250 annual cap.  This law has been criticized by some as having too many loopholes.  For instance, the limit does not apply to an “educational function” or certain “widely attended” events.  Disclosure of spending at these events is still required when spending exceeds $250 per official.

Lawmakers also passed a ban on PAC-to-PAC transfers of funds.  This, lawmakers hope, will reduce the “shell game” sometimes played which makes it very difficult for the public to track who is actually funding candidates or making expenditures.

Several of the laws passed impacted the actions of state officials directly.  Starting in 2014, a state lawmaker will no longer be allowed to hold another government job.  Additionally, the reforms include a ban on “pass through pork.”  This is a practice whereby state lawmakers could direct an agency to spend money a certain way without legislative approval.  Finally, the Alabama Ethics Commission will be granted subpoena power; this is expected to make enforcement of the laws much easier and effective.

The most controversial bill passed during the session is one banning politically active groups from receiving contributions via payroll deduction from state employees.  This law was decried as an attack on the American Education Association, a group usually linked to Democratic candidates.  Governor Riley, a Republican, defended the bill as a step to prevent misuse of state time and money.

While most agree the reform package is not perfect or all-inclusive, most within the state’s ethics and political circles agree they are a significant step forward at a time when Alabama badly needs one.

Photo of the Alabama Statehouse by Spyder_Monkey on Wikipedia.