Next week there will be an exciting conference in Washington, D.C. called the Gov 2.0 Summit. This is its second annual conference and is hosted by UBM TechWeb and Tim O’Reilly of O’Reilly Media – famous for all of those computer manuals.

From September 7-8 at the Grand Hyatt Washington, the Gov 2.0 Summit will gather thinkers from all over to share ideas about the relationship between social media and government. According to its Web site:

“Gov 2.0 Summit brings together innovators from government and the private sector to highlight technology and ideas that can be applied to the nation’s great challenges. … Our focus this year is on opening the door to innovation, learning about the latest technology and its application, and breaking down the barriers to its adoption.”

The private sector cost to attend Gov 2.0 Summit – $1495, public sector – $995.

This is a great Web site. The list of sponsors, speakers, vendors, and attendees is fascinating – and you can even watch videos of presentations from last years’ gathering. (That alone makes the site worth visiting, even if you have no intention of attending the Summit.) Who knows, maybe I’ll go!

Let me know if you are going. And if you do go, please share your impressions of the Summit!

The Nevada Legislative Ethics Commission has announced it will increase lobbyist registration fees for 2011. The fee has been set at $300 for paid lobbyists, triple the current amount. The fee for unpaid lobbyists will remain at $20.

According to the Lobbyist Registration Overview:

“The penalty for failure to file any monthly expenditure report(s) or to file late is $10 per day until the report(s) is submitted.”

If you have any questions, the Registration Office contact is (775) 684-6800.

Here is the overview from the Nevada Legislative Web site.

Photo by Ryan Jerz in Wikipedia.

The proposed Cuyahoga County ethics code is the product of a review conducted by a working group of volunteers who reviewed the ethics practices of 13 similar counties. The proposed code includes provisions for lobbyist registration and reporting, campaign finance disclosure, and “pay-to-play” provisions for public contracts.

The code calls for a new five person entity called the Cuyahoga County Ethics Board which will oversee ethics education and enforcement as well as a County Ethics Officer who would be empowered to render advisory opinions, process and initiate ethics complaints, and conduct investigations.

Finally, the new code provides for whistleblower protection for county employees who report suspected illegal or unethical conduct.

We have an exciting calendar this fall. Maybe we will see you there?

• September 27-29, 2010   PAC State and Local Government Relations Seminar, Alexandria, Virginia

• October 5-6, 2010   Practising Law Institute Corporate Political Affairs Seminar, Washington, D.C.

• November 11-14, 2010   Capitolbeat Conference, Phoenix, Arizona

• November 20-23, 2010   SGAC Leaders’ Policy Conference, Scottsdale, Arizona

• December 5-8, 2010   2010 COGEL Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C.

A federal judge rejected Republican strategist Greg McNeilly’s request for an injunction on the limits, which have remained unchanged since 1976.

McNeilly argued the limits have not kept pace with inflation and constitute an infringement on his First Amendment rights. In Michigan, individuals can donate $500 to a candidate for state House, and $1,000 to a Senate candidate.

The lawsuit seeking to strike down these campaign contribution limits will be heard, but not before the November 2 election.

This post is a follow-up to a previous article on Michigan campaign finance from July 7 – “Michigan Campaign Contribution Limits Challenged,” by Steve Quinn.

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.

Here is a question we have been asked many, many times by clients over the years.

Q. How do I most accurately calculate my pro-rata share of compensation when I am registered as a lobbyist in five different states? Do I take my gross annual salary and divide it by five?

A. If you take your gross annual salary and divide it by five, you will undoubtedly over-report your compensation. Although you can never go wrong over-reporting, you should also strive for accurate reporting, especially in this instance.

Think of your lobbying in terms of hours. Review your calendar a month, or even a week, at a time to determine the number of hours you lobbied in a particular state. Now, assign a dollar value to those hours, and the result is accurate reporting.

To do this, follow this formula:

1.    Take your gross annual salary and divide it by 2,080 (52 weeks in a calendar year multiplied by 40 hours per week). This is your hourly rate.

2.    Multiply the number of hours you lobbied by your hourly rate. This amount is the reportable pro-rata share of your compensation for lobbying in that state.

Here’s an example:

1.     Gross annual salary is $120,000.

2.     $120,000 divided by 2,080, is an hourly rate of $57.69.

3.    Fifteen hours lobbied in a particular state during a reporting period, multiplied by the hourly rate of $57.69, is $865.35. In this example, this is your reportable pro-rata share of your compensation for lobbying.

Of course, you have work weeks that exceed 40 hours. And you also go on vacation. Using 2,080 as the number of work hours in a calendar year is a generally accepted accounting principle that will sustain scrutiny of even the most stringent of state auditors.

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 Lodi News-Sentinel recently ran a story about campaign contributions in Lodi, California. The article discusses contributions that fall below the state’s $100 disclosure threshold. Elizabeth Bartz, the president and CEO of State and Federal Communications, Inc., offers her insights about California campaign finance laws and places it within the context of laws in other states.

You can find her insights here:

“Campaign: Donations of $99 or less never see light of day,” by Maggie Creamer in the Lodi News-Sentinel.

Jim Walls, who runs the watchdog Web site AtlantaUnfiltered.com, has requested the opinion after language concerning such contributions and any limitations imposed was recently questioned before the State Ethics Commission. A vote by the Commission could remove caps on such contributions in the near future; however, if the vote were to remove the caps, it is expected to result in a bill being introduced before the state legislature to impose clear limits on these contributions.

For further reading:

“Ethics Commission to issue advisory opinion on campaign transfers,” by Walter Jones in the Rome News-Tribune.

“Law setting funding limits in elections could be gutted,” by Jim Walls in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Here is letter of request by Jim Walls to the State Ethics Commission of Georgia.

Beginning September 7th, independent expenditures exceeding $250 must be reported within 48 hours of the expenditure. Starting on October 20th, independent expenditures exceeding $100 must be reported within 24 hours. Other reports of independent expenditures will be required on September 7th, October 12th, and October 19th.

Here is the Notice on Reporting Independent Expenditures on the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices Web site.

Photo by AlbanyNY on Wikipedia.

Commissioners, their family members, and their staff will no longer be permitted to accept gifts from lobbyists registered with the county, employers of registered lobbyists, or vendors or contractors of the county. Commissioners will not be permitted to be employed as lobbyists or engage in lobbying activities before municipalities or other local government entities within the county.

Further, family members and office staff of a commissioner will not be permitted to lobby before the Board of County Commissioners or other local government entities within Broward County.

The National Park Service’s National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is a great place to find out more about the history of Washington D.C. One of its fascinating offerings is the Willard Hotel.

Since 1847, the Willard Hotel has been an important political hub and has hosted most of the U.S. Presidents since Zachary Taylor. Starting out as a row of small homes, the beautiful Beaux-Arts hotel you see today was built in 1904.

According to the NRHP site, the hotel has had quite a guest list:

“Presidents Taylor, Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan, Lincoln, Grant, Taft, Wilson, Coolidge and Harding stayed at the Willard. Other notable guests have included Charles Dickens, Buffalo Bill, David Lloyd George, P.T. Barnum, Lord and Lady Napper, and countless others. Walt Whitman included the Willard in his verses and Mark Twain wrote two books there in the early 1900s.”

Part of the legend of the Willard Hotel is that it is the place where the term “lobbyist” became associated with people who try to influence government. According to the legend, people seeking to gain favor from President Ulysses S. Grant would find him smoking cigars and drinking brandy in the lobby of the Willard Hotel.

Here is a 2006 NPR recording of Liane Hansen on “Weekend Edition Sunday” talking to Barbara Bahny about the hotel’s reopening and its history of lobbying.

Apparently many people called NPR to point out that the term “lobbying” had existed long before the Willard Hotel, so Hansen did a follow-up piece called “A Lobbyist by Any Other Name?” on the history of the term.

In case you would like to visit, here is the Web site for the Willard InterContinental Hotel today. I wonder if they still allow cigar smoking in the lobby?

On that note, I’ll end with this quote from the NRHP Web site:

“It was Vice President Thomas R. Marshall, irritated at the Willard’s high prices, who there coined the phrase ‘What this country needs is a good 5-cent cigar.’”

The photo at the top is by AgnosticPreachersKid on Wikipedia.

North Carolina, which has a notoriously strict gift ban, permits lobbyists to provide meals and beverages at events held in conjunction with legislative conferences, provided certain conditions are met. In order for the gift exception to apply, either all members of the senate, house, recognized legislative caucus, or the entire general assembly must be invited, and at least 10 individuals associated with the lobbyist or the lobbyist’s organization must attend.

Kentucky does not have a strict ban against lobbyists providing meals to legislators, but there is a $100 annual limit. However, if there is an event where all members of the house or senate, or approved caucus are invited, the amount spent on food and beverages is not counted against the $100 limit.

Not only do many states have exceptions to their gift laws in relative to national legislative conferences, but some also have different reporting requirements. States like Missouri and Georgia allow for group reporting, rather than naming each legislator that attended. In South Dakota, lobbyists are not required to report their expenditures at national conferences at all, provided that the legislature is not in session at the time.

Ballot Measure 1 was touted as a way to increase transparency in lobbying and end “pay to play” politics. The measure was strongly and publicly opposed by unions, local governments, and business groups who were concerned the measure would have quieted the voice of many Alaskans in the political arena.

For further reading:

“Ballot Measure 1 soundly rejected,” by Lisa Demer in the Anchorage Daily News.

“Ballot Measure 1 rejected by wide margin,” by Ted Land on KTUU.com.

The Act was introduced as a response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.  It passed the House, but failed in the Senate before the August recess.  It is headed back to the floor for a vote next month when the Senate returns.

The Act would amend the Federal Election Campaign Act as follows:

• Prohibit foreign-controlled domestic corporations from making contributions and expenditures;
• Require that prior to making any contribution or expenditure, the highest ranking official of a corporation must file a certification with the FEC that they are not prohibited from making the contribution or expenditure;
• Declare that a domestic corporation is permitted to create and solicit contributions for a separate segregated fund, as long as a foreign national does not contribute to or have any power or control over the fund;
• Require that any person or corporation that makes an independent expenditures of more than $10,000:
  • File a disclosure report within 24 hours of the expenditure; and
  • File a new report each time they make or contract to make another expenditures of $10,000 or more;
  • Require that certain radio or television ads include a statement identifying the name of the committee responsible for it; and
  • Require corporations, labor organization, non-profits, and political organizations to report additional information on their independent expenditure reports, including certain transfers of money.

  Photo by Diliff on Wikipedia.